On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 12:36 AM, Andrey Bokhanko <[email protected]>wrote:
> Also, Chandler, is it safe to assume that if some time (a week? two > weeks?) passed and no-one but Chris (or someone else knowledgeable with > OpenMP but not clang code owner) reviewed a patch, the very fact of no > review [from clang code owners] suggests that the patch is not disruptive > enough / too OpenMP-specific for clang code owners to step in and do code > review personally? Especially given that said "clang code owners" are > extremely few in numbers -- like three people on Earth, if I remember > correctly? > http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#code-reviews lays out pretty clearly that no, it isn't OK? Granted, there are areas where a review from code owner is a *must*. But in > my opinion, such areas are quite limited in case of OpenMP patches -- > basically, only when common infrastructure / code is changed. Agree? > I think that the code owners will let you know when you have patches that could have gone in with post-commit review. Certainly, in areas where I am a frequent reviewer I always make sure to note in reviews when I think the patch satisfied the "obviousness" bar or was sufficiently isolated to a part of the code maintained by the person already. I cannot possibly say whether or not this is the case -- I don't actually know these parts of Clang well enough. If you get Doug, or John, or Richard to say so, you're good-to-go. I suspect they would do so in the code review itself.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
