<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/08/2016 09:00 PM, Sean Silva via
llvm-dev wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHnXoam-sQ5gmyUHt2URZdyu4C1YKcBaexk=4gnSKz67mrxATA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Recently there's been some friction over reversions
(I can remember two cases in recent memory). In both issues the
general feel I got is that as a community we should honor
"revert for more design review" requests unconditionally.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What do you guys think of adding something like this to
DeveloperPolicy.rst as an item at the end of the numbered list
in <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#code-reviews">http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#code-reviews</a>
?<br>
<div><br>
<div>#. Sometimes patches get committed that need more
discussion.</div>
<div> If a developer thinks that a patch would benefit
from some more review</div>
<div> and promptly communicates this, the patch should be
reverted (preferably</div>
<div> by the original author, unless they are
unresponsive).</div>
<div> Developers often disagree, and erring on the side of
the developer</div>
<div> asking for more review prevents any lingering
disagreement over code in</div>
<div> the tree.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
+1 to the general proposal. A couple of small word tweaking
suggestions:<br>
1) we should emphasize this is a "no fault" situation. i.e. it's
not that the author did anything wrong per se.<br>
2) "thinks that a patch" -> "thinks that a recently committed
patch" + drop the promptly bit<br>
3) "should be reverted" -> "should be reverted promptly".<br>
4) Add a sentence: "Reverting a patch ensures that design
discussions can happen without blocking other development; it's
entirely possible the patch will end up being reapplied essentially
as is once concerns have been resolved."<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHnXoam-sQ5gmyUHt2URZdyu4C1YKcBaexk=4gnSKz67mrxATA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"promptly" is there mostly to avoid suggesting a
"necro-revert"; once the code has been in tree for long enough
at some point it would be more appropriate to open a bug
report or start a fresh discussion.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"unresponsive" add some nebulousness, but I think it's an
important exception to call out for the "preferably by the
original author".<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-- Sean Silva</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>