> The last statement kinda contradicts the first two statements and > since most of the changes I do are regarding changing source version > is downloaded I'd like to know if: If you think of the statements of a if..else type setup then they don't contradict.
if ( fix_typo ) review_not_needed else if ( bumping tarball etc ) review_not_needed else review_needed - I have to send the spec files for review when I change source-2.3.10-1 to source-2.3.10-15, (like, bugfix 15 of the 2.3.10 release) * This does not review under: # simply bumping to a new tarball version, removing upstream patches, trivial patch merges are exempt from review, however, please get all non-trivial patch changes reviewed; this is also a great opportunity to check the status of those patches - I have to send the spec file for review when I change source-2.3.10-1 to source-2.3.28 (minor release upgrade within the 2.3 release) * This does not review under: # simply bumping to a new tarball version, removing upstream patches, trivial patch merges are exempt from review, however, please get all non-trivial patch changes reviewed; this is also a great opportunity to check the status of those patches - I have to send the spec file for review when I change bleh to blerGh due to thick fingers or breadcrumbs. * This does not review under: # typo fixes or similar trivial changes need not be reviewed ----- Original Message ----- From: Patrick Ale <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 8:07 pm Subject: [jds-review] Clear up on what to review and what not To: JDS-Review <jds-review at opensolaris.org> > Hi, > > Before I get ahead of myself and doing commits which will get me > killed by Sun, I have some doubts about the review policy mentioned on > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/jds/documents/code_review/ > > In particular: > # typo fixes or similar trivial changes need not be reviewed > # simply bumping to a new tarball version, removing upstream patches, > trivial patch merges are exempt from review, however, please get all > non-trivial patch changes reviewed; this is also a great opportunity > to check the status of those patches > # spec file changes other than adding the Patch / %patch / %changelog > entries are subject to review > > The last statement kinda contradicts the first two statements and > since most of the changes I do are regarding changing source version > is downloaded I'd like to know if: > - I have to send the spec files for review when I change > source-2.3.10-1 to source-2.3.10-15, (like, bugfix 15 of the 2.3.10 > release) > - I have to send the spec file for review when I change > source-2.3.10-1 to source-2.3.28 (minor release upgrade within the 2.3 > release) > - I have to send the spec file for review when I change bleh to blerGh > due to thick fingers or breadcrumbs. > > I'm sorry if the answers are obvious to you guys but I really don't > want to mess anything up or step on someone's toes. > > > -- > Patrick Ale > Email: patrick.ale at gmail.com > IRC: WickedWicky
