Updated conditions of submission below.

Anders Bjornerstedt wrote:
> Summary: IMM: Update the README file to document NO_DANGLING [#635]
> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 635
> Peer Reviewer(s): Neel ; Zoran
> Pull request to: 
> Affected branch(es): default(4.4)
> Development branch: 
>
> --------------------------------
> Impacted area       Impact y/n
> --------------------------------
>  Docs                    n
>  Build system            n
>  RPM/packaging           n
>  Configuration files     n
>  Startup scripts         n
>  SAF services            y
>  OpenSAF services        n
>  Core libraries          n
>  Samples                 n
>  Tests                   n
>  Other                   n
>
>
> Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> changeset 3bf3cece1ea7d11d76ac3f7cd1df0577388dc70f
> Author:       Anders Bjornerstedt <anders.bjornerst...@ericsson.com>
> Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 16:33:20 +0100
>
>       IMM: Update the README file to document NO_DANGLING [#635]
>
>       Also updated README.2PBE with a pointer to always at least provide the
>       imm.xml file at both SCs, when initial start is to be be performed for a
>       2PBE cluster.
>
>
> Added Files:
> ------------
>  osaf/services/saf/immsv/README.NO_DANGLING
>
>
> Complete diffstat:
> ------------------
>  osaf/services/saf/immsv/README             |   14 +++++-
>  osaf/services/saf/immsv/README.2PBE        |   20 +++++---
>  osaf/services/saf/immsv/README.NO_DANGLING |  113 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 137 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
>
> Testing Commands:
> -----------------
>
>
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --------------------------
>
>
> Conditions of Submission:
> -------------------------
> Ack from Neel
>   
Will push this only after ticket #49 (IMM: Support reference integrity 
checking)  has been pushed.

/AndersBj
>
> Arch      Built     Started    Linux distro
> -------------------------------------------
> mips        n          n
> mips64      n          n
> x86         n          n
> x86_64      n          n
> powerpc     n          n
> powerpc64   n          n
>
>
> Reviewer Checklist:
> -------------------
> [Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
>
>
> Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
>
> ___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
>     that need proper data filled in.
>
> ___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
>
> ___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
>
> ___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
>
> ___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
>
> ___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
>
> ___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
>     (i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
>
> ___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
>     Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
>
> ___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
>
> ___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
>     like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
>
> ___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
>     cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
>
> ___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
>     too much content into a single commit.
>
> ___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
>
> ___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
>     Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
>
> ___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
>     commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
>
> ___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
>     of what has changed between each re-send.
>
> ___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
>     comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
>
> ___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc)
>
> ___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
>     the threaded patch review.
>
> ___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
>     for in-service upgradability test.
>
> ___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
>     do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT 
> organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance 
> affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your 
> Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Opensaf-devel mailing list
> Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
>   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT 
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance 
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your 
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to