proactive at catching incoming bugs in their components and dealing with them
promptly.
+Please be aware that all public LLVM mailing lists are public and archived, and
+that notices of confidentiality or non-disclosure cannot be respected.
+
.. _patch:
.. _one-off patches:
a file inline, making it difficult to work with for reviewers using that
program.
+When submitting patches, please do not add confidentiality or non-disclosure
+notices to the patches themselves. These notices conflict with the `LLVM
+License`_ and may result in your contribution being excluded.
+
.. _code review:
Code Reviews
all necessary review-related changes.
#. Code review can be an iterative process, which continues until the patch is
- ready to be committed.
+ ready to be committed. Specifically, once a patch is sent out for review, it
+ needs an explicit "looks good" before it is submitted. Do not assume silent
+ approval, or request active objections to the patch with a deadline.
+
+Sometimes code reviews will take longer than you would hope for, especially for
+larger features. Accepted ways to speed up review times for your patches are:
+
+* Review other people's patches. If you help out, everybody will be more
+ willing to do the same for you; goodwill is our currency.
+* Ping the patch. If it is urgent, provide reasons why it is important to you to
+ get this patch landed and ping it every couple of days. If it is
+ not urgent, the common courtesy ping rate is one week. Remember that you're
+ asking for valuable time from other professional developers.
+* Ask for help on IRC. Developers on IRC will be able to either help you
+ directly, or tell you who might be a good reviewer.
+* Split your patch into multiple smaller patches that build on each other. The
+ smaller your patch, the higher the probability that somebody will take a quick
+ look at it.
Developers should participate in code reviews as both reviewers and
reviewees. If someone is kind enough to review your code, you should return the