labath added a comment. In D123020#3437246 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D123020#3437246>, @llunak wrote:
> In D123020#3426867 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D123020#3426867>, @JDevlieghere > wrote: > >> FWIW the official policy is outlined here: >> https://llvm.org/docs/CodeReview.html > > I'm aware of it, but as far as I can judge I was following it. Even reading > it now again I see nothing that I would understand as mandating review for > everything. It does say "patches that meet likely-community-consensus requirements can be committed prior to an explicit review" and "where there is any uncertainty, a patch should be reviewed prior to being committed". It can be hard to judge what is a likely-community-consensus without being an active member of the community, which is why it's safer to go down the pre-commit review path. Also note that when I said that "all patches are expected to be reviewed", that included both pre-commit and post-commit review. I deliberately used passive voice because in the latter case, there's nothing for you (as the patch author) to do. It's generally up to the owners of individual components to ensure that all patches going in get reviewed by someone. Since there's no paper trail, this is very hard to verify, but I can tell you that people do that, and that it's not a good way to introduce yourself to someone. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D123020/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D123020 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
