On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Vane, Edwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Alright, point taken. It was just my feeling from past review requests and > comments from others saying this community is generally in favour of > post-commit reviews that I thought this was the right course of action. > I'll take this to mean explicit directions are required to change to > post-commit. > Yes, the community is generally all right with post-commit review, and you should use good judgement to figure out when it's not needed. The interesting part is that once you decide that a change needs pre-commit review (usually because of being unsure about a certain part of it), you're usually right :) Always feel free to ping me about changes, or let me know if changes are the blocking part for something else you work on, so I can prioritize them. Cheers, /Manuel > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Manuel Klimek [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 9:02 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: Daniel Jasper; Douglas Gregor; Vane, Edwin; [email protected]; > > Chandler Carruth > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Tooling: Call-back for begin/end of sources for > > newFrontendActionFactory > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Edwin Vane <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Moving to post-commit review. > > > > > > > > Just FYI: this is usually a discouraged pattern :) If you have the > feeling that > > something needs pre-commit review once, there are very few things that > would > > make it actually useful to switch to post-commit (apart from doug > telling you on > > IRC, which you would then note in the review) > > > > Cheers, > > /Manuel > > > > > > > > http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D882 > > > > BRANCH > > callbacks > > > > ARCANIST PROJECT > > clang > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
