On 7/11/2014 11:47 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 7/11/2014 11:38 AM, John Baldwin wrote: >> On Friday, July 11, 2014 12:16:26 pm John Baldwin wrote: >>> Author: jhb >>> Date: Fri Jul 11 16:16:26 2014 >>> New Revision: 268531 >>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/268531 >>> >>> Log: >>> Fix some edge cases with rewinddir(): >>> - In the unionfs case, opendir() and fdopendir() read the directory's full >>> contents and cache it. This cache is not refreshed when rewinddir() is >>> called, so rewinddir() will not notice updates to a directory. Fix this >>> by splitting the code to fetch a directory's contents out of >>> __opendir_common() into a new _filldir() function and call this from >>> rewinddir() when operating on a unionfs directory. >>> - If rewinddir() is called on a directory opened with fdopendir() before >>> any directory entries are fetched, rewinddir() will not adjust the seek >>> location of the backing file descriptor. If the file descriptor passed >>> to fdopendir() had a non-zero offset, the rewinddir() will not rewind to >>> the beginning. Fix this by always seeking back to 0 in rewinddir(). >>> This means the dd_rewind hack can also be removed. >>> >>> While here, add missing locking to rewinddir(). >>> >>> CR: https://phabric.freebsd.org/D312 >>> Reviewed by: jilles >>> MFC after: 1 week >> >> Just picking my own commit here as a sample case. >> >> I think we should be annotating commits with phabricator code reviews in >> some >> way when a change has gone through that review. It is very useful to get >> back >> to the review details from the commit log message in svnweb, etc. >> >> I can see a number of different ways to do this, but I do think it would be >> nice to pick a consistent way to do it. >> >> Things to consider: >> >> 1) The tag ("CR:" is what I used above). I don't care, just pick one. I >> chose CR since Warner used it previously. Whatever we decide, we should >> add it to the template. >> >> 2) ID vs full URL. For PRs we just list the bug ID and not the full URL >> (same for Coverity). I would be fine with that so long as someone hacks >> up svnweb to convert the IDs into links (the way it handles PR bug >> numbers). OTOH, if you use the full URL you get that for free in svnweb, >> and you also get it in mail clients, etc. It helps that the URL isn't but >> so long. >> >> This is more of a pie-in-the-sky, but it would be _really_ nice if arcanist >> were hacked up to support our local commit template and would auto populate >> the 'Reviewed by' and 'CR' (or whatever it ends up being called) fields so >> one >> could use 'arc commit'. >> >> So what do folks prefer for 1) and 2)? >> > > FYI Ports has been using the convention: "Phabric\tDXXX" >
'Phabric:\tDXXX' with : of course. -- Regards, Bryan Drewery
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature