From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8936 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2006 04:13:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 8926 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Mar 2006 04:13:16 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from eastrmmtao06.cox.net (HELO eastrmmtao06.cox.net) (68.230.240.33) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 04:13:15 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([68.9.66.48]) by eastrmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060330041311.UASE9108.eastrmmtao06.cox.net@localhost.localdomain> for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 23:13:11 -0500 Received: from bob by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.52) id 1FOoX7-00033S-VW for gdb@sourceware.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 23:13:17 -0500 Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:10:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Using a patch queue? Message-ID: <20060330041317.GA11686@brasko.net> References: <20060330001459.GA13813@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060330001459.GA13813@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00216.txt.bz2 On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 07:14:59PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > Daniel Berlin offered in February to set up a patch queue. It's some > custom software that he wrote for GCC, after two consecutive GCC Summits > in which people agreed that they wanted some automated way to keep track of > patches, but no one came up with anything that seemed usable. > > Here's the GCC one: > http://www.dberlin.org/patches/ > http://dberlin.org/patchdirections.html > > I've never used it except to play with it, but a lot of GCC contributors do, > as you can see. I think that's a pretty compelling point in its favor, > since they have a similar workflow to ours. > > The patch tracker follows the list (via the web archives, I think) and > collects annotated messages. You're under no obligation to annotate your > messages; anyone can manually add a URL to the patch tracker via the web > interface. I believe the first review response removes the patch from the > queue; we might want to save :REVIEWMAIL: for final approval/rejection. > Or it might be useful enough just to track patches which have never > been looked at, which happens quite a lot. > > I wouldn't mind having a better tool than my inbox to track down what needs > looking at; I don't have enough time to review everything that needs > reviewing as it is. Anyone else have an opinion? For what it's worth, I like the idea a lot. Bob Rossi