ack, code review only/Thanks HansN

On 02/21/2018 05:40 PM, Anders Widell wrote:
Summary: pyosaf: Fix broken imports in imm-listener and 
imm-listener-inheritance-impl [#2786]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2786
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans, Srikanth
Pull request to:
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2786
Base revision: d3ec106e9f66a25cedb2ce01e72a25375d53bb11
Personal repository: git://

Impacted area       Impact y/n
  Docs                    n
  Build system            n
  RPM/packaging           n
  Configuration files     n
  Startup scripts         n
  SAF services            n
  OpenSAF services        n
  Core libraries          n
  Samples                 n
  Tests                   n
  Other                   y

Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):

revision 26c8b5634ca013afe656853c47ec8c49fbc2c742
Author: Anders Widell <>
Date:   Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:17:12 +0100

pyosaf: Fix broken imports in imm-listener and imm-listener-inheritance-impl 

Complete diffstat:
  python/samples/imm-listener                  | 3 ++-
  python/samples/imm-listener-inheritance-impl | 3 ++-
  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Testing Commands:

Start the imm-listener and imm-listener-inheritance-impl sample programs.

Testing, Expected Results:

The sample programs shall start successfully.

Conditions of Submission:

Ack from reviewer(s).

Arch      Built     Started    Linux distro
mips        n          n
mips64      n          n
x86         n          n
x86_64      y          y
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., 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,!
Opensaf-devel mailing list

Reply via email to