* Upstreaming Reviewed-by to git.git @ 2021-03-29 10:56 Bagas Sanjaya 2021-03-29 12:15 ` Christian Couder 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Bagas Sanjaya @ 2021-03-29 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: git Hi, I had reviewing patches here, but how can my reviews be credited with Reviewed-by tags to the applicable patches on git.git (Git SCM) repo (upstream)? -- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Upstreaming Reviewed-by to git.git 2021-03-29 10:56 Upstreaming Reviewed-by to git.git Bagas Sanjaya @ 2021-03-29 12:15 ` Christian Couder 2021-03-29 21:03 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Christian Couder @ 2021-03-29 12:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bagas Sanjaya; +Cc: git Hi, On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 1:03 PM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > I had reviewing patches here, but how can my reviews be credited with > Reviewed-by tags to the applicable patches on git.git (Git SCM) > repo (upstream)? When you have reviewed a patch or a patch series, you can tell the reviewer you are ok with the patch or patch series, and that you are ok with them adding your "Reviewed-by: yourname <youremail>" to it. If you are applying to the GSoC or other such program, you can also put links to the discussions you participated in in your proposal. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Upstreaming Reviewed-by to git.git 2021-03-29 12:15 ` Christian Couder @ 2021-03-29 21:03 ` Junio C Hamano 2021-03-30 0:43 ` Junio C Hamano 2021-03-30 7:21 ` Christian Couder 0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2021-03-29 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christian Couder; +Cc: Bagas Sanjaya, git Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 1:03 PM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I had reviewing patches here, but how can my reviews be credited with >> Reviewed-by tags to the applicable patches on git.git (Git SCM) >> repo (upstream)? > > When you have reviewed a patch or a patch series, you can tell the > reviewer you are ok with the patch or patch series, and that you are > ok with them adding your "Reviewed-by: yourname <youremail>" to it. I think you meant "you can tell the reviewEE", not reviewer. In general, anybody can review a patch, but a review by somebody who is not all that familiar with the codebase does not carry a lot of weight. Reviews from those who have already invested a lot in the code that is being fixed or extended would obviously be very helpful, as they are expected to know how the current code is supposed to work well, and reviews from those who have worked on other parts of the system that depend on the code that is being fixed or extended would also be usefl, as they know what the callers of the code being changed expect out of it. So my suggestion to Bagas is not to worry too much about "Reviewed-by" with your name, until you have your own code in the codebase (and while doing so, you should worry about adding reviewed-by by others). In any case, reading others' patch, together with the original version before the patch changed, is a great opportunity to learn the codebase and how the project work in general. It is highly recommended. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Upstreaming Reviewed-by to git.git 2021-03-29 21:03 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2021-03-30 0:43 ` Junio C Hamano 2021-03-30 7:21 ` Christian Couder 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2021-03-30 0:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christian Couder; +Cc: Bagas Sanjaya, git Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > In any case, reading others' patch, together with the original > version before the patch changed, is a great opportunity to learn > the codebase and how the project work in general. It is highly > recommended. Addendum. The above makes it sound as if I am encouraging new people to only read to learn silently, but that is not what I meant. Reading and then expressing what you read in the patch in your own words is a good way for you to learn the system. And it is also a good way for the patch author to ensure what was written in the patch is understandable. For somebody who is totally new to the codebase, any patch that is more complex than the most trivial might not be hard to understand and that is not a patch author's fault, but once contributors have learned the codebase enough, even before they have their own changes to our codebase, a new patch should be written in such a way to understandable by them without getting misunderstood. So a mere "this looks good to me" by new people may not add much value to the discussion, but thinking aloud in more detail, expressing why they think the patch is good, e.g. "I think this change tries to do X by doing Y. If I were doing so, I might do so by Z, but I think Y would be a better approach than that" would help others to see that what is written in the patch was truly understandable (if what the new person said was to the point) or misleading (otherwise). Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Upstreaming Reviewed-by to git.git 2021-03-29 21:03 ` Junio C Hamano 2021-03-30 0:43 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2021-03-30 7:21 ` Christian Couder 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Christian Couder @ 2021-03-30 7:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Bagas Sanjaya, git On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 11:03 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: > > Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 1:03 PM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I had reviewing patches here, but how can my reviews be credited with > >> Reviewed-by tags to the applicable patches on git.git (Git SCM) > >> repo (upstream)? > > > > When you have reviewed a patch or a patch series, you can tell the > > reviewer you are ok with the patch or patch series, and that you are > > ok with them adding your "Reviewed-by: yourname <youremail>" to it. > > I think you meant "you can tell the reviewEE", not reviewer. Yeah, sorry and thanks for all your explanations. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-03-30 7:22 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2021-03-29 10:56 Upstreaming Reviewed-by to git.git Bagas Sanjaya 2021-03-29 12:15 ` Christian Couder 2021-03-29 21:03 ` Junio C Hamano 2021-03-30 0:43 ` Junio C Hamano 2021-03-30 7:21 ` Christian Couder
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).