[llvm-dev] How to get a review for a patch?

Ralf Jung via llvm-dev
Tue, 26 Feb 2019 11:20:42 -0000

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>
>
>