[PATCH] D109810: [doc] documentation of code review tools

[Shivam Gupta via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

xgupta added a comment.

They are listed in random order, listing them according to their activity would be better.



================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:141
+* `llvm-zorg <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-zorg/>`_
+* `Llvm-www <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-www>`_	
+* `lvm-test-suite <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-test-suite>`_	
----------------



================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:142
+* `Llvm-www <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-www>`_	
+* `lvm-test-suite <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-test-suite>`_	
+* `LNT <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-lnt>`_	
----------------



================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:153
+* `llvm-foundation-www <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-foundation-www>`_
+* `Llvm-www <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-www>`_
+* `clangd-www <https://github.com/llvm/clangd-www>`_
----------------



================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:153
+* `llvm-foundation-www <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-foundation-www>`_
+* `Llvm-www <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-www>`_
+* `clangd-www <https://github.com/llvm/clangd-www>`_
----------------
xgupta wrote:
> 
better if we have one review tool to contribute, only phabricator would be the right place for llvm-www.  


================
Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:155
+* `clangd-www <https://github.com/llvm/clangd-www>`_
+* `mlir-npcomp <https://github.com/llvm/mlir-npcomp>`_
+* `llvm-test-suite <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-test-suite>`_
----------------
mlir-npcomp renamed to torch-mlir.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D109810/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D109810