phantom/bitcoin
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git synced 2025-01-24 18:23:26 -03:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 1

doc: Rework section on ACK

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
MarcoFalke 2019-06-05 10:17:57 -04:00
parent 5d37c1bde0
commit fac5ddfc57
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: CE2B75697E69A548
1 changed files with 21 additions and 10 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

31
CONTRIBUTING.md
View file

@ -237,24 +237,35 @@ request. Typically reviewers will review the code for obvious errors, as well as
test out the patch set and opine on the technical merits of the patch. Project test out the patch set and opine on the technical merits of the patch. Project
maintainers take into account the peer review when determining if there is maintainers take into account the peer review when determining if there is
consensus to merge a pull request (remember that discussions may have been consensus to merge a pull request (remember that discussions may have been
spread out over GitHub, mailing list and IRC discussions). The following spread out over GitHub, mailing list and IRC discussions).
#### Conceptual Review
A review can be a conceptual review, where the reviewer leaves a comment
* `Concept (N)ACK`, meaning "I do (not) agree in the general goal of this pull
request",
* `Approach (N)ACK`, meaning `Concept ACK`, but "I do (not) agree with the
approach of this change".
A `NACK` needs to include a rationale why the change is not worthwhile.
NACKs without accompanying reasoning may be disregarded.
#### Code Review
After conceptual agreement on the change, code review can be provided. It is
starting with `ACK BRANCH_COMMIT`, where `BRANCH_COMMIT` is the top of the
topic branch. The review is followed by a description of how the reviewer did
the review. The following
language is used within pull-request comments: language is used within pull-request comments:
- (t)ACK means "I have tested the code and I agree it should be merged", involving - "I have tested the code", involving
change-specific manual testing in addition to running the unit and functional change-specific manual testing in addition to running the unit and functional
tests, and in case it is not obvious how the manual testing was done, it should tests, and in case it is not obvious how the manual testing was done, it should
be described; be described;
- NACK means "I disagree this should be merged", and must be accompanied by - "I have not tested the code, but I have reviewed it and it looks
sound technical justification (or in certain cases of copyright/patent/licensing
issues, legal justification). NACKs without accompanying reasoning may be
disregarded;
- utACK means "I have not tested the code, but I have reviewed it and it looks
OK, I agree it can be merged"; OK, I agree it can be merged";
- Concept ACK means "I agree in the general principle of this pull request";
- Nit refers to trivial, often non-blocking issues. - Nit refers to trivial, often non-blocking issues.
Reviewers should include the commit hash which they reviewed in their comments.
Project maintainers reserve the right to weigh the opinions of peer reviewers Project maintainers reserve the right to weigh the opinions of peer reviewers
using common sense judgement and also may weight based on meritocracy: Those using common sense judgement and also may weight based on meritocracy: Those
that have demonstrated a deeper commitment and understanding towards the project that have demonstrated a deeper commitment and understanding towards the project