svn commit: r340326 - head

[Ian Lepore]

On Mon, 2018-11-12 at 06:00 -0800, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> > 
> > I absolutely approve of Ben's excellent addition to UPDATING, a
> > text document.
> At no point did I raise ANY objectection to the content
> of his change, stop trying to make that the issue.
> 
> > 
> > Your demands for additional scrutiny and time-wasting around code
> > review are ridiculous and disproportionate, and certainly a poor
> > reward for Ben's straightforward and unimpeachable effort to
> > improve
> > our UPDATING documentation.
> My demands are reasonable, as I stated them, your ignoring them
> and casting focus on my non dmeands however is pointless.
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Ben, thank you for submitting and committing the UPDATING change
> > and
> > please try to ignore Rod's hyper-criticism.
> What you are totally ignoring is that Ben infact TAGGED me into
> the review process, causing me to process yet another email only
> to go look at the review to find it had been closed by a commit
> in < 4 hours total elapsed time.
> 
> That is BULLSHIT and I am calling it BULLSHIT.  And though Ben
> is the poor victom of example here, he is not the only guilty
> party, and though this is a trivial change, it is not the change
> that I am ranting about, but the fact that the process is
> broken.
> 
> IF YOUR GOING TO TAG SOMEONE INTO A REVIEW YOU MUST GIVE THEM
> TIME TO RESPOND BEFORE YOU COMMIT, otherwise your just wasting
> there time.  
> 
> Do NOT tag me into a review if your going to commit it before
> I can possibly be expected to respond.  I well rant on anyone
> who does that.
> 
> CLEAR NOW?
> 

You seem to be very confused about phabricator and the review process.
Being added to the list of reviewers in no way implies that your
signoff is REQUIRED before a commit can occur. If you don't have time
to jump on a review immediately, but some other committer does, then
that's good enough, the process is working to perfection.

-- Ian


> > 
> > Conrad
> > 
> > 
> > On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 5:07 PM Rodney W. Grimes
> > <freebsd at pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ]
> > > > 
> > > > On Sun, 11 Nov 2018 at 2:43 am, Rodney W. Grimes <
> > > > freebsd at pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > If your going to bother with a differential, and invite
> > > > > people to
> > > > > it you should give them at least 24 hours, and preferably 72
> > > > > hours
> > > > > to respond to the new review.  Reviews that last < 4 hours
> > > > > are not
> > > > > code reviews.
> > > > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > Rod Grimes
> > > > > rgrimes at freebsd.org
> > > > > 
> > > > Hi Rod,
> > > > 
> > > > Sorry. The main reason I submitted the code review is because I
> > > > do not have
> > > > my src commit bit, so needed to seek approval to commit.
> > > All the more reason for it to wait until the people you *invited*
> > > to
> > > the review to have a chance to respond.
> > > 
> > > I do not believe an "accept" in a review is an "approve to commit
> > > beyond your normal scope".
> > > 
> > > Was cem aware that he was "approving a non src committer to
> > > commit
> > > this change to the src tree" as your review has no mention that
> > > you
> > > are seeking src bit approval to commit there.
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I felt the need to commit the UPDATING entry was time
> > > > sensitive, given the
> > > > change it was notifying users of had already been committed.
> > > > 
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Ben
> > > > --
> > > --
> > > Rod Grimes                                                 rgrime
> > > s at freebsd.org
> > > 
> >