[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

[Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

aaron.ballman added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:87-91
-#. Patches should be made with ``git format-patch``, or similar (see special
-   commands for `Requesting Phabricator review via the web interface
-   <Phabricator.html#phabricator-request-review-web>`_ ). If you use a
-   different tool, make sure it uses the ``diff -u`` format and that it
-   doesn't contain clutter which makes it hard to read.
----------------
vext01 wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > Changing this would require an RFC to see if the community wants to get rid of our requirement that patches be formatted. Personally, I'd be opposed to such a change; I think this should be kept.
> Is there confusion between `git format-patch` and `git clang-format` here?
> 
> To be clear, I'm not proposing that the source code you change isn't syntactically formatted. But `git format-patch` does not do syntactic formatting, it just writes a diff to disk.
> 
> I don't think it matters how you generate your diff, but your changes need to have gone through `git clang-format` as described elsewhere in the llvm docs.
Oh, yes, that is confusion on my end! I was thinking `git clang-format`, so this part is fine by me. Thanks!


================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:419-421
-Your first commit to a repository may require the autogenerated email to be
-approved by a moderator of the mailing list.
-This is normal and will be done when the mailing list owner has time.
----------------
vext01 wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > Rather than get rid of this, I think we might actually want to broaden it. I read this blurb as letting folks know that sometimes commit messages take a while before they show up on the commit list. It used to be the primary way that happened was when making a commit for the first time. Now it happens most often for large commits (due to the size of the email content) or a long list of CCs (often added automatically by Herald, though the moderation of these has gotten better in recent history).
> > 
> > I think it's kind of helpful to let people know that sometimes the automated emails get caught out by moderation. But if others don't think that's of value to mention, then we can go ahead and remove this bit.
> Actually, now I read it again, I realise that I don't understand what this sentence means:
> 
> > Your first commit to a repository may require the autogenerated email to be approved by a moderator of the mailing list.
> 
> My first commit to a llvm repository was via github, and github doesn't discriminate. If you have write-access to the repo, then your push to `main` will surely go ahead. There are no automated emails involved as far as I know.
> 
> I suspect this prose is from pre-github, where the process was different?
> Actually, now I read it again, I realise that I don't understand what this sentence means:

Ah, I think I see where the confusion may be coming in.

We have a post-commit hook that pushes all commits to a commits email list: https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/ (as an example, there's also commits list for LLVM and others), and it's existed for a *long time*. It used to be that your commits were written to the commits list as though they came from you directly (e.g., https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130225/074838.html), and these days they come in as though from a list bot (e.g., https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20220627/424937.html); check out the from line just below the title to spot the differences. So the old issue was that when you first pushed a commit, you may not have been subscribed to cfe-commits and your commit message wouldn't make it to the lists. Now the issue is that when you push any commit, it might be caught up by moderation filters (this also used to be an issue, but it wasn't the most likely issue for people to hit).


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D128645/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D128645