[PATCH] D99305: [docs] Document our norms around reverts

[Hubert Tong via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

hubert.reinterpretcast added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:317-318
+* If you break a buildbot in a way which can't be quickly fixed, please revert.
+* If a test case is reported in the commit thread which demonstrates a problem
+  please revert, and investigate offline.
+* If you receive substantial :ref:`post-commit review <post_commit_review>`
----------------
hubert.reinterpretcast wrote:
> How portable and self-contained is this test case?



================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:338
+
+What are the expectations around a revert?
+
----------------
I think moving this part up (and reducing the assumptions below that the reverting party is not the author and also the assumptions that the //action// of "reverting" is taking place) would be an improvement.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D99305/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D99305