Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 08:55:14 +0100 From: Gert Doering Message-ID: <20171207075514.GF69387@...1296...> References: <99D61A626FDA8A4B90A270669121BE108587DF29@...2294...> <99D61A626FDA8A4B90A270669121BE10858830C4@...2294...> <20171204192515.GA69387@...1296...> <99D61A626FDA8A4B90A270669121BE1085B4AC9A@...2294...> <99D61A626FDA8A4B90A270669121BE1085B4CA4D@...2294...> <99D61A626FDA8A4B90A270669121BE1085B4D703@...2294...> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lpUp1egui7PDlNtH" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <99D61A626FDA8A4B90A270669121BE1085B4D703@...2294...> Subject: Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH 09/13] Signed/unsigned warnings of MSVC resolved List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Simon Rozman Cc: Selva Nair , Gert Doering , "openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" --lpUp1egui7PDlNtH Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi, On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 06:41:03AM +0000, Simon Rozman wrote: > > > Should your patch be merged, I shall rebase the "[PATCH 09/13] > > Signed/unsigned warnings of MSVC resolved" to the new master and deliver > > the next version. > > > > Yes, if you can review and ack/nak it :) >=20 > You mean Gert to ack/nak it? I don't believe I have earned enough reputat= ion to do it yet. Formally we have no really clear line on "who can do ACK/NAK" (and this has caused a bit of friction in the past, my fault, apologies). I tend to see ACKs as "I have stared at the code, ran some tests, can't see anything bad in the code and the change is useful" - but usually,=20 David or I do our own review and tests before actually merging.=20=20 Depending on the "track record" of the one sending that ACK, it might be=20 a very loose review, or very thorough :-) (like, when Steffan ACKs a crypto patch, all I do is "does it compile and pass t_client test?", but I do not try to understand crypto library API nuances...). Sometimes I find things in post-ACK-review that reopen the discussion, though :-) NAKs are maybe even more important - "watch out, this code might break under circumstances x, y, z!" - while the reviewer only considered cases a, b and c... So - feel free to comment on patches you feel qualified to review! > However, I did stare-review your code: > - It does not introduce any new Windows API calls it has not used before. > - It compiles fine. Good enough for a start :-) gert --=20 now what should I write here... Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@...1296... --lpUp1egui7PDlNtH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGcBAEBAgAGBQJaKPPhAAoJEB2Cnv7KVigSOooMALHeX05+TiN9IJ4pAnpHt7q/ uN//lb9Vyp3oQrXMUIKeuCCFPEs+swGptAbmF3oeCqkCMlrEgdHlJcIRMlKwTXX1 OWE/7IS6S2876ssCWLyO/3ducJXxiZpK4/bN5XIsTDF6ldgsmSMEGytfNjii+W89 mdaLZe9d6DnSU4nJDpReu92BPyFYsh6pqy7y5LQpWwSRh3MU1rlHbAHjr3lyq1KR VjOjnAFfk+tX05K1XSw6SDqO2uB3Q8axDfbTSO6nAjHYAUlSjDhvGOKyEbtYvIjG uTg/8RWamW8bjshNFZWSlbtBf3wTl54CBnKUfrwIRBj29yAlkILKoeIjyqPmfwFe AhKqYMtar7Qeij9Yi5gsFF9LahfKOgeBey3kLD1zP7d0idnXpX/fPDoLoNX10TRS 9rBtRYL/VGxG7eFPHja8sd9mMfXn+zG5+r2j1+pW3Fwc3I4hJ4LlK6tqPV6QLHzQ f82kt03pofpKYUEQe/5zBxkgL4T/smPkYCXgVvkj6g== =ZsYT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lpUp1egui7PDlNtH--