Hi all, I submitted a small documentation patch [1] three weeks ago. This is my first patch submitted against LLVM, so I was extra careful to follow the instructions (turns out this is quite a bit more complicated than the pull-request-based workflow). So far, I got no reaction at all to my patch. Does that mean I did something wrong, like picking the wrong reviewer? Should I pick another one? Obviously I don't know the code organization nor any of the people involved, so I don't feel I can meaningfully judge who might be able to review this patch. [1]: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57600 Kind regards, Ralf
Shoaib Meenai via llvm-dev
2019-Feb-25 16:40 UTC
[llvm-dev] How to get a review for a patch?
Hi Ralf, You added the old account for Eli (eli.friedman); I went ahead and switched it to the newer account (efriedma). You can tell it's an old account because if you go to https://reviews.llvm.org/p/eli.friedman/ (which can be accessed by e.g. clicking the eli.friedman in your reviewers list), the last activity is from 2016, whereas https://reviews.llvm.org/p/efriedma/ has recent activity. Hopefully that gets you some activity. It's also customary to add llvm-commits as a subscriber instead of a reviewer, but that shouldn't make too much of a difference. The standard procedure is also to ping reviews weekly, which helps get review activity in most cases. From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of Ralf Jung via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Reply-To: Ralf Jung <post at ralfj.de> Date: Monday, February 25, 2019 at 9:03 AM To: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: [llvm-dev] How to get a review for a patch? Hi all, I submitted a small documentation patch [1] three weeks ago. This is my first patch submitted against LLVM, so I was extra careful to follow the instructions (turns out this is quite a bit more complicated than the pull-request-based workflow). So far, I got no reaction at all to my patch. Does that mean I did something wrong, like picking the wrong reviewer? Should I pick another one? Obviously I don't know the code organization nor any of the people involved, so I don't feel I can meaningfully judge who might be able to review this patch. [1]: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__reviews.llvm.org_D57600&d=DwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=geYJV3f7Jpb0hmOUToiU6RGGPLWOQ7wWwah_AlGL2_4&s=G82iq_IAHTCK264gxt8V7oXf20Ppt7zmAzr53wWGpks&e Kind regards, Ralf _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=geYJV3f7Jpb0hmOUToiU6RGGPLWOQ7wWwah_AlGL2_4&s=zn_t2nciTI6584SuUNb5yuFVbzfaJ1qrHco7ELwMRxI&e -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190225/11174259/attachment-0001.html>
Hi Shoaib,> You added the old account for Eli (eli.friedman); I went ahead and switched it > to the newer account (efriedma). You can tell it's an old account because if you > go to https://reviews.llvm.org/p/eli.friedman/ (which can be accessed by e.g. > clicking the eli.friedman in your reviewers list), the last activity is from > 2016, whereas https://reviews.llvm.org/p/efriedma/ has recent activity. > Hopefully that gets you some activity.Thanks a lot! That seems like an easy trap to run into. Is there a way to not suggest the old accounts (in the drop-down menu) when adding reviewers?> It's also customary to add llvm-commits > as a subscriber instead of a reviewer, but that shouldn't make too much of a > difference.Thanks, I'll try to remember this for next time. I did this based on the following text in [the docs](https://llvm.org/docs/Phabricator.html#phabricator-request-review-web):> Add reviewers (see below for advice). (If you set the Repository field correctly, llvm-commits or cfe-commits will be subscribed automatically; otherwise, you will have to manually subscribe them.)I was not aware of there being separate notions of "reviewers" and "subscribers", so with this being in the "Add reviewers" not I thought "to subscribe" meant "to add as a reviewer". Actually from what I recall, llvm-commits had been added automatically (but I might misremember). (I hope this kind of feedback helps to improve the documentation.) Kind regards, Ralf> > > > The standard procedure is also to ping reviews weekly, which helps get review > activity in most cases. > > > > *From: *llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of Ralf Jung via > llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *Reply-To: *Ralf Jung <post at ralfj.de> > *Date: *Monday, February 25, 2019 at 9:03 AM > *To: *llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *Subject: *[llvm-dev] How to get a review for a patch? > > > > Hi all, > > > > I submitted a small documentation patch [1] three weeks ago. This is my first > > patch submitted against LLVM, so I was extra careful to follow the instructions > > (turns out this is quite a bit more complicated than the pull-request-based > > workflow). So far, I got no reaction at all to my patch. Does that mean I did > > something wrong, like picking the wrong reviewer? Should I pick another one? > > Obviously I don't know the code organization nor any of the people involved, so > > I don't feel I can meaningfully judge who might be able to review this patch. > > > > [1]: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__reviews.llvm.org_D57600&d=DwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=geYJV3f7Jpb0hmOUToiU6RGGPLWOQ7wWwah_AlGL2_4&s=G82iq_IAHTCK264gxt8V7oXf20Ppt7zmAzr53wWGpks&e> > > > Kind regards, > > Ralf > > _______________________________________________ > > LLVM Developers mailing list > > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=geYJV3f7Jpb0hmOUToiU6RGGPLWOQ7wWwah_AlGL2_4&s=zn_t2nciTI6584SuUNb5yuFVbzfaJ1qrHco7ELwMRxI&e> > >