Hi Hieu,

Reviewed and tested the patch.
Ack.

/Neel.

On 2017/04/21 12:57 PM, Hieu Nguyen wrote:
> Summary: imm: Improve ccb error string handling [#2367]
> Review request for Ticket(s): 2367
> Peer Reviewer(s): *** Zoran Milinkovic, Neelakanta Reddy, Hung Nguyen / Hieu 
> Nguyen ***
> Pull request to: *** Hung Nguyen ***
> Affected branch(es): develop
> Development branch: ticket-2367
> Base revision: bfebede5783121fc363f63536bbb89ba3355152e
> Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/dhiengu/review
>
> --------------------------------
> 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):
> ---------------------------------------------
>
>
> revision 4d4a99a72857515c71a5cc03314121f21f185e9a
> Author:       Hieu Nguyen <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:21:40 +0700
>
> imm: Improve ccb error string handling [#2367]
>
>
>
> Complete diffstat:
> ------------------
>   src/imm/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 61 
> +++++++----------------------------------------
>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
>
>
> Testing Commands:
> -----------------
> See the ticket for more details.
>
>
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --------------------------
>
>
>
> Conditions of Submission:
> -------------------------
> Ack from reviewers.
>
>
> 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 ~/.gitconfig file (i.e. user.name, user.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.
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to