[v3 6/7] process.rst: Perform minor cleanups
trini at konsulko.com
Thu Jul 14 14:07:45 CEST 2022
- 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
@@ -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
-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.
@@ -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
+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.
@@ -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
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