Ack Regards, Vu
>-----Original Message----- >From: giang do [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 11:57 AM >To: [email protected]; [email protected]; >[email protected] >Cc: [email protected] >Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for LOG: Log Service configuration >changes are rejected on one node cluster [#1387] > >Summary: LOG: Log Service configuration changes are rejected on one node >cluster Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1387 Peer Reviewer(s): Mathi Pull >request to: Lennart Affected branch(es): devel Development branch: <<IF ANY >GIVE THE REPO URL>> > >-------------------------------- >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): >--------------------------------------------- > <<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>> > >changeset 7f7d697c93fc50ac53c4911483a210525d763290 >Author: giang do<[email protected]> >Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2015 13:10:08 +0700 > > log: Log Service configuration changes are rejected on one node > cluster[#1387] > > Remove checking that peer version is equal or bigger than version 3 >before > allow changes in mailbox limits. > > >Complete diffstat: >------------------ > osaf/services/saf/logsv/lgs/lgs_imm.c | 91 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- >----------------------------------------- > 1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-) > > >Testing Commands: >----------------- >#logtest > >Testing, Expected Results: >-------------------------- >All testcase shall PASS > >Conditions of Submission: >------------------------- >Acked from peer reviewer > >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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog! Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools in one place. SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
