HACKING: add explanation why we want cool-off times as long as a week or two
Change-Id: I281e9145f43bc7ac173e02c4e209834f0deaae2b Signed-off-by: Øyvind Harboe <oyvind.harboe@zylin.com> Reviewed-on: http://openocd.zylin.com/254 Tested-by: jenkins Reviewed-by: Spencer Oliver <spen@spen-soft.co.uk> Reviewed-by: Mathias Küster <kesmtp@freenet.de> Reviewed-by: Øyvind Harboe <oyvindharboe@gmail.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
3d0e2547fe
commit
ac4340e391
23
HACKING
23
HACKING
|
@ -121,4 +121,25 @@ git push review
|
|||
|
||||
Further reading:
|
||||
|
||||
http://www.coreboot.org/Git
|
||||
http://www.coreboot.org/Git
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
When can I expect my contribution to be committed?
|
||||
==================================================
|
||||
|
||||
The code review is intended to take as long as a week or two to allow
|
||||
maintainers and contributors who work on OpenOCD only in their spare
|
||||
time oportunity to perform a review and raise objections.
|
||||
|
||||
With Gerrit much of the urgency of getting things committed has been
|
||||
removed as the work in progress is safely stored in Gerrit and
|
||||
available if someone needs to build on your work before it is
|
||||
submitted to the official repository.
|
||||
|
||||
Another factor that contributes to the desire for longer cool-off
|
||||
times (the time a patch lies around without any further changes or
|
||||
comments), it means that the chances of quality regression on the
|
||||
master branch will be much reduced.
|
||||
|
||||
If a contributor pushes a patch, it is considered good form if another
|
||||
contributor actually approves and submits that patch.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue