Hi Alex,
Thanks for your comment.
I just now floated the patch with your comment, please review.
Thanks,
Meenakshi
High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
www.hasolutions.in
--------- Original Message --------- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request
for plm: correct first arguement of API saPlmEntityGroupAdd() in apitest [#1983]
From: "Alex Jones" <[email protected]>
Date: 8/27/18 10:42 pm
To: "Meenakshi TK" <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Hi,
This test is currently not enabled in test_saPlmEntityGroupCreate.c. Can
you please enable it as part of this ticket?
Alex
On 08/20/2018 07:37 AM, Meenakshi TK wrote:
NOTICE: This email was received from an EXTERNAL sender
Summary: plm: correct first arguement of API saPlmEntityGroupAdd() in apitest
[#1983]
Review request for Ticket(s): 1983
Peer Reviewer(s):[email protected]
Pull request to: Alex
Affected branch(es): all
Development branch: ticket-1983
Base revision: 1c19eddc9f03ebd18ab85b67ab50e3e5037b449e
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/meenatk-hasoln/review
--------------------------------
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 y
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
*** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE ***
revision 58a05affe898227fa96e1a08eaa37f4055077da2
Author: Meenakshi TK <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 14:24:00 +0530
plm: correct first arguement of API saPlmEntityGroupAdd() in apitest [#1983]
Complete diffstat:
------------------
src/plm/apitest/test_saPlmEntityGroupAdd.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Perform compilation on 32-bit machine
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
All tests of apitest passed
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from Alex
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. 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
