On 01/10/2019 09:22, Chris Johns wrote:
On 1/10/19 3:50 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 01/10/2019 01:40, Chris Johns wrote:
On 30/9/19 10:45 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
[...]
+* The patch builds. All RTEMS tests link with this patch.
+
+* The patch does not introduce new compiler warnings.
This step is not in the figure.
You mean there should be a step mentioning this checklist?
Sorry, I missed by a line, I meant the patch builds. I am wondering if building
should be in the figure, that is the figure and this text match. I think it is
important to point out in a bold manner patches need to build and need to work.
I know this is common sense but ....
What about this figure:
http://www.plantuml.com/plantuml/png/dLDXQnf14Fr-ls8u2bNAIHBwfVP3JKrf0ur8RA41lwntSzuqjxFNsJd5Vz-zNK5ReOK8WZlptfktRzoPLoFQspPx3QlbtO_YAvN87elx2bcf9fGfpEV5nwTYTLkydLnb0JXttK5esoYCvcEukRf-1sWtM5LOmKOCiOVFTlCb2vyedsNJMn73MuI3wmNAPlZjWNZDXW6DFu0w4DmHxi5mjURIDIZ82ftHiW6FGkZV3q9TrmPqWq45o-UMl4Bj9E4Iv9vtxXcdaETRYarhj8ZzF1_wA-GgAfnh3mOgt64x4qNh9qwsKJUPIZI5nG2x2QTzGot2w35sKNpWsc3yx6eN4pwCWJoCdj2FCu3fdOi8mLyz2PwOKKNGA881nltV2GJgzwuAxHI2ivOKB7fl8hiidLJ4s_QGiF_F2-0VYK6nWrUBc5lqNFOMMOzwoN0jpi8EnPFZ5D02ti3rcl_8e1xoChMYn69U54KEBJ56vLEuaHjhBzjJu1ntit3ZBACQHijp-jx4aB3JuSzwEF9GXlM4MNnQqBBtpSNuDQjBHN4_iTJ0xvmdTPBoPgS8yMs40y13xnKs29LZ7AOPZkN7RvyULc0DiOOloYHKW_78ph3roNrCd7nfv3A6U56gXmVckcmM3k4D_mO0
@startuml
start
:Arrange your changes in\nan easy to review and\ncoherent patch series;
:Apply the checklist for patches;
:Invoke: ""git format-patch"";
:Send the patch series to devel@rtems.org for review;
:Set N to 2;
while (Reviewers demand changes in the patch series?) is (Yes)
:Do the required changes and create a new patch series;
:Update the commit messages accordingly;
:Apply the checklist for patches;
:Invoke: ""git format-patch -v $N"";
:Document the changes from version N to N + 1\nin the patch file
after the "---" line;
:Set N to N + 1;
:Send the patch series to devel@rtems.org for review;
endwhile (No)
if (Patch series was accepted by reviewers?) then (Yes)
:Push the patch series\nto the project repository;
note right
Must be done by an
RTEMS maintainer.
end note
else (No)
:Discard the patch series;
endif
stop
@enduml
Built against which BSPs?
This is for the user manual. I think at least one arbitrary BSP which is
affected by the patch should be sufficient.
Joel and I now have the BSP builder building on a regular basis because we found
things broke in weird ways across archs and bsps. If we had a patch smoke test
tool available it would help but we do not.
Yes, this is the long term goal.
+* The patch does not introduce new test failures in existing tests.
This step is not in the figure.
Again which BSPs? This assumes expected fails are valid for the bsps being
tested.
I think we should not add to many details to the figure.
The list of steps here does not matching the figure is a potential source of
user problems if the user inspects the figure and skims the written text.
What about tickets and the "Closes ...", "Updates ..." etc tags?
Yes, this is missing. What should be checked as well?
What does "checked" mean?
I mean items (individual checks) for the Checklist for Patches.
--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
PGP : Public key available on request.
Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
