Can you send one more request with one class (SG/SU) changed to use this?
Thanks,
Hans

On 26 March 2014 12:27, Hans Nordeback <[email protected]> wrote:
> Summary: amfd: use template class db to replace patricia tree db V2
> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): [#713]
> Peer Reviewer(s): HansF, Nagu, Praveen
> Pull request to:
> Affected branch(es): default
> Development branch: default
>
> --------------------------------
> Impacted area       Impact y/n
> --------------------------------
>  Docs                    n
>  Build system            n
>  RPM/packaging           n
>  Configuration files     n
>  Startup scripts         n
>  SAF services            n
>  OpenSAF services        y
>  Core libraries          n
>  Samples                 n
>  Tests                   n
>  Other                   n
>
>
> Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
> ---------------------------------------------
>  <<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>>
>
> changeset 429bf7bb3234aef766c3347e638af562dde5560a
> Author: Hans Nordeback <[email protected]>
> Date:   Fri, 17 Jan 2014 10:12:17 +0100
>
>         amfd: use template class db to replace patricia tree db V2 [#713]
>
>
> Added Files:
> ------------
>  osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/include/db_template.h
>
>
> Complete diffstat:
> ------------------
>  osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/include/db_template.h |  63 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
>
> Testing Commands:
> -----------------
>  <<LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES>>
>
>
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --------------------------
>  <<PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS>>
>
>
> Conditions of Submission:
> -------------------------
>  <<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Opensaf-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to