On Thu, 24 May 2018 12:29:21 -0400 Mike Blumenkrantz <michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com> wrote: > > To restate and completely define every term used: my proposal is that > every patch submitted during a release cycle must be reviewed prior > to the release deployment.
The intention maybe more clear to say View and Comment or Acknowledge. Where as; View + Comment == Review That seems to be what Mike is saying below essentially. Not a simple "Thank you for your submission" comment. Some comment of substance to acknowledge the work has been "reviewed" or committed, rejected, etc. That should not take long to at least skim something submitted and make an initial comment. If actionable, that may take more time. > Definitions of terms used: ... > REVIEWED: someone in the commiters project group ( > https://phab.enlightenment.org/tag/committers/) must comment on a > patch, either rejecting it (entirely or because it requires changes), > accepting it (stating intent to merge during the release cycle, > intent to merge after the release cycle, or as a conceptual approval > of a patch which needs subsequent and more in-depth review by someone > else), or simply commenting on it to indicate whether it is a > beneficial change which should eventually be accepted -- William L. Thomson Jr.
pgp4nw3BxfLSP.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
