[PATCH 6/7] process.rst: Perform minor cleanups
xypron.glpk at gmx.de
Wed Jul 13 19:43:25 CEST 2022
On 7/11/22 19:14, Tom Rini wrote:
> - Use gender-neutral language to refer to the user, consistently.
> - Reword a few places so that they read more naturally.
> - Make the long standing practice around "Twilight Time" more clear,
> - Replace a reference to MAKEALL with a reference to CI testing as
> that's the current requirement.
> Cc: Claudius Heine <ch at denx.de>
> Cc: Martin Bonner <martingreybeard at gmail.com>
> Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk at gmx.de>
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com>
> Changes in v2:
> - Further tweak the wording, per Martin
> doc/develop/process.rst | 33 +++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/doc/develop/process.rst b/doc/develop/process.rst
> index 534da4a2a704..d0c46b58f3e9 100644
> --- a/doc/develop/process.rst
> +++ b/doc/develop/process.rst
> @@ -46,21 +46,22 @@ Twilight Time
> Usually patches do not get accepted as they are - the peer review that takes
> -place will usually require changes and resubmits of the patches before they
> +place will usually require changes and resubmissions of the patches before they
> are considered to be ripe for inclusion into mainline.
> -Also, the review often happens not immediately after a patch was submitted,
> +Also the review often happens not immediately after a patch was submitted,
> but only when somebody (usually the responsible custodian) finds time to do
> -In the result, the final version of such patches gets submitted after the
> +The result is that the final version of such patches gets submitted after the
> merge window has been closed.
> It is current practice in U-Boot that such patches are eligible to go into the
> upcoming release.
> -In the result, the release of the ``"-rc1"`` version does not immediately follow
> -the closing of the Merge Window.
> +The result is that the release of the ``"-rc1"`` version and formal closing of
> +the Merge Window does not preclude patches that were already posted from being
> +merged for the upcoming release.
> Stabilization Period
> @@ -75,13 +76,13 @@ Sometimes it is not clear if a patch contains a bug fix or not.
> For example, changes that remove dead code, unused macros etc. or
> that contain Coding Style fixes are not strict bug fixes.
> -In such situations it is up to the responsible custodian to decide if he
> -applies such patches even when the Merge Window is closed.
> +In such situations it is up to the responsible custodian to decide if they
The custodian is singular.
> +apply such patches even when the Merge Window is closed.
> Exception: at the end of the Stabilization Period only strict bug
> fixes my be applied.
> -Sometimes patches miss the the Merge Window slightly - say by few
> +Sometimes patches miss the Merge Window slightly - say by a few
> hours or even a day. Patch acceptance is not as critical as a
> financial transaction, or such. So if there is such a slight delay,
> the custodian is free to turn a blind eye and accept it anyway. The
> @@ -110,7 +111,7 @@ Custodians
> The Custodians take responsibility for some area of the U-Boot code. The
> -in-tree ``MAINTAINERS`` files list who is reponsible for which areas.
> +in-tree ``MAINTAINERS`` files list who is responsible for which areas.
> It is their responsibility to pick up patches from the mailing list
> that fall into their responsibility, and to process these.
> @@ -155,7 +156,7 @@ like this:
> #. Applies cleanly to the source tree
> - #. passes a ``MAKEALL`` compile test without creating new warnings
> + #. Passes :doc:`ci_testing` as this checks for new warnings and other issues.
> #. Notes:
> @@ -167,7 +168,7 @@ like this:
> #. This is well documented in :doc:`designprinciples`.
> - #. The custodian decides himself how recent the code must be. It is
> + #. The custodian decides themselves how recent the code must be. It is
The custodian is singular.
> acceptable to request patches against the last officially released
> version of U-Boot or newer. Of course a custodian can also accept
> patches against older code.
> @@ -177,7 +178,7 @@ like this:
> #. The custodian decides to accept or to reject the patch.
> -#. If accepted, the custodian adds the patch to his public git repository and
> +#. If accepted, the custodian adds the patch to their public git repository and
> notifies the mailing list. This note should include:
> * a short description of the changes
> @@ -186,15 +187,15 @@ like this:
> * suggested tests
> - Although the custodian is supposed to perform his own tests
> - it is a well-known and accepted fact that he needs help from
> + Although the custodian is supposed to perform their own tests
> + it is a well-known and accepted fact that they needs help from
> other developers who - for example - have access to the required
> hardware or tool chains.
> The custodian request help for tests and feedback from
> specific maintainers and U-Boot users.
> #. Once tests are passed, some agreed time limit expires, the custodian
> - requests that the changes in his public git repository be merged into the
> - main tree. If necessary, the custodian may have to adapt his changes to
> + requests that the changes in their public git repository be merged into the
> + main tree. If necessary, the custodian may have to adapt their changes to
> allow for a clean merge.
> Todo: define a reasonable time limit. 3 weeks?
More information about the U-Boot