svn commit: r521892 - in head/math: . R-cran-alabama
Devin Teske
dteske at freebsd.org
Fri Jan 3 20:02:34 UTC 2020
> On Jan 3, 2020, at 11:17, Pedro Giffuni <pfg at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 03/01/2020 13:01, Devin Teske wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 3, 2020, at 06:50, Adriaan de Groot <adridg at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Friday, 3 January 2020 09:36:28 CET Mathieu Arnold wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 12:56:48AM +0000, Devin Teske wrote:
>>>>> Author: dteske (src committer)
>>>> As stated by this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ you are not a ports committer. So you
>>>> are required to get approval, and state the approval in your commits,
>>>> saying it has been reviewed is not enough.
>>>>
>>>>> Reviewed by: mat, imp (previous revision)
>>>>> Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D22675
>>> Question for mat@, just to be clear: the issue here is (only) that there
>>> should be an extra line in the commit message,
>>> Approved by: mat
>>> or possibly
>>> Approved by: mat (mentor)
>>> as described in the committer's guide [1].
>>>
>>> The Phab review was approved (accepted), so it's just the documentation of
>>> process?
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/
>>> commit-log-message.html
>>>
>> The process is broken currently as I’ve been denied a ports commit bit and my mentorship is null and void for a ports bit.
>>
>> I do not not know how to navigate such a situation.
>>
>> In this case, would review be akin to approval and thus, whomsoever reviewed it that is an active ports committer is therefore the approver?
>
> Active committers can commit to other parts of the tree if they get approval from other active committers in that branch. It works both ways: src committers can (exceptionally) do ports or doc commits, and the other way around. However, a phabricator review is not an approval unless it is explicit.
>
> Just my $0.02,
>
What explicitly constitutes apprroval then?
—
Devin
More information about the svn-ports-head
mailing list