From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms1.migadu.com with LMTPS id QJqsFEDjDmZmNwAAqHPOHw:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 19:28:32 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id QJqsFEDjDmZmNwAAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 19:28:32 +0200 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1712251712; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=HT/0IphMiXTLfI6aX1pi3ZPvjietWyAcwhJ32T5/LlRU5DhvJbsWbONMj43WIaMRvF7SWO UH9XBhWP5rtCm8oC6i8FrG0H3qMsMxbRcHEnBmfr6Pd60LEAIc16wysZPdPUS/aPswnIaX yKtMTk9LNo4cFmFzZhZ/0Nm7po+Xzp3kZafyK/i6f87ZHb54/A97jUkGujcDXHmoJtU1sE n3JRFJV4qLNScXZqkl35EkSywLWbR5yqmxomlFEw4AlOQY6IFywEyrTjVad0orxRBVJoOk yq6cFNboshBkmW8lgrv+4LRr5m28/x8cDLGItLFw4q17llxISG8ZEtshjs05KA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1712251712; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=VTBsWfWOPkInbl3DQPil3EhapJZAl4WiUUy2CRdAqvM=; b=p6Xm4+DdJ8ceZZNtEMxVTqlAs6ESpMCg3wvBxIC2qUYWDGIUTyKgaRoWR474g+Oj21yKdj CJMVfENuhyeOZHsF27Aw/Yi129Sg7Q+yuSbl+xSilGjaeukHC1HW3ES8CSDIzycjarLEpX t6a75uWZS9+oB2BMoZalMjHBcnDIIRN7RqmG7YuAsm+wJgCChRRGoVotChUJBwnRL6HmrU BTZOU6vv868csPsBHJTDZHJRFfweiJWhB0ouh/x4IBD7TUZIFvLigTlHme8uE5I8zVp+TS uPHoFp75b8V9TS9BtspTHxy9Yqps1v7AKqD5KfzmgkpdqkPDpQt3CFIlf+79zQ== Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17C1B72388 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 19:28:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rsQsT-0001kB-Da; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 13:27:53 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rsQsR-0001jj-Lr for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 13:27:51 -0400 Received: from vmi993448.contaboserver.net ([194.163.141.236] helo=mutix.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rsQsN-0005c9-W9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 13:27:49 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.172] (host81-147-82-218.range81-147.btcentralplus.com [81.147.82.218]) (Authenticated sender: cdo) by mutix.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8C43FA63768; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 19:27:44 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 18:27:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.0 Subject: Re: Coordinators for patch review session on Tuesday Content-Language: en-US To: Steve George Cc: guix-devel , efraim@flashner.co.il References: <55f9be63-419e-57ba-7bd8-691cf80ab012@mutix.org> From: Christina O'Donnell In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=194.163.141.236; envelope-from=cdo@mutix.org; helo=mutix.org X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-2.407, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Spam-Score: -4.86 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 17C1B72388 X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.86 X-Migadu-Scanner: mx10.migadu.com X-TUID: jNjQE7BSxHzy Hi, Thanks for your reply, > 1. Changing the tag to reviewed-looks-good > > It doesn't look like this worked. The way to do this is in the instructions are 4. 'Set a user tag' [0], probably the easiest way is to send an email (I do get funny results sometimes with my email client): > > Subject: setting usertag on 65938 > > user guix > usertag 65938 + reviewed-looks-good > quit > > The first line is important it has to be 'user guix' for it to appear on the patch review reports [1]. I think I messed up the instructions in the Wiki - you have to have a + in between the bug number and the tag you want to set (sorry about that). Please try again. Ah I got it this time. I was missing the 'user guix'. I didn't read the wiki and tried to look it up from the debbugs documentation. > This is really just a way of signalling that reviews are happening - so trying to keep us in sync. The usertags we're using are: > > - patch-review-hackers-list > - under-review > - escalated-review-request > - waiting-on-contributor > - reviewed-looks-good If I change the patch quite a lot, should I mark it as 'escalated-review-request' instead of 'reviewed-looks-good'? And should I remove them from the patch-review-hackers-list after I've responded > The patch changes all look reasonable to me, you've already done a lot: Great, thanks! Good to know I'm doing things vaguely right! > 1. You should add a reviewed-by trailer: > Reviews are contributions from our community (and work!) so we should recognise them and add trailers. It also helps the maintainer know who did the review and therefore the level of confidence. > > Basically just add 'Reviewed-by: A Person - [2] Sure, do you want me resubmit these patches to add that? > It looks like your updated patch retriggered QA, so if you look here and the foolow the Data Service link on the right you can see it's building it: > > https://qa.guix.gnu.org/issue/65938 > > The last step will be for a maintainer to see that it's built correctly, see your review and to apply it - great job for a first patch review! Wonderful! The first of many, I'm hoping. Kind regards, Christina