svn commit: r345050 - head/bin/date

[Warner Losh]

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019, 9:43 AM John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org> wrote:

> On 3/11/19 10:43 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 11:25 PM Rodney W. Grimes <
> freebsd at gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>>> Author: imp
> >>>> Date: Tue Mar 12 04:49:59 2019
> >>>> New Revision: 345050
> >>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/345050
> >>>>
> >>>> Log:
> >>>>   Remove now useless -d and -t flags.
> >>>>
> >>>>   These were used to set dst flag and minutes west of UTC
> >>>>   respectively. These are obsolete and have been removed form the
> >>>>   kernel. These existed primarily to faithfully emulate early
> >>>>   Unix ABIs that have been removed from FreeBSD.
> >>>>
> >>>>   Reviewed by: jbh@, brooks@
> >> Nits:  jhb@ and I see he did comment in the review, but he did not
> >> accept it as a reviewew at the top.
> >>
> >
> > This is why I think just the reference to the differential revision is
> > perfectly fine. Why duplicate data? Others complained I hadn't included
> it.
> > He commented, we discussed it on irc (though most of it was about how to
> > use arc better), etc. I thought it warranted it. So please don't nitpick.
> > This level is really annoying and frustrating. Does this really help us
> > produce a better product?
>
> To be fair, we have been pretty consistent that 'Reviewed by' in the commit
> means 'Accepted' in phab.  I probably would have ended up accepting this
> anyway and just didn't click the box, so it's ok.  However, we have had
> folks in the past who were tagged in the past and gave feedback, but didn't
> approve of the change, but were listed as 'Reviewed by' hence the current
> practice.
>

But we talked about it outside phab, which to my mind puts it under the old
rules. And it's not Rod's job to police this detail. It would be up to you
to hassle me if I misinterpreted that extra communication wrong.

Warner

>