From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oa1-x33.google.com (mail-oa1-x33.google.com [IPv6:2001:4860:4864:20::33]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 540B83858C2F for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 21:07:10 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 540B83858C2F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linaro.org Received: by mail-oa1-x33.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-1319573379eso2081212fac.0 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 14:07:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:user-agent:references:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=/AxeABhVfsMK5+ygUvTYuANj+GkfTcUn1yOA8HPZRZM=; b=duZaWBj13Omf2LM4naGZ5dMTOPiSThSD50RR6cwgmVFX7brj5rkLRA81JVBisLIiAM Ezr0L7AbpL6DdM6qW7fgHmHnqynlfFfNDe/P2QNC2MSEHC9mDD4rNQ/rUOg0au/ZbY5G OfD30YwexpVP2PFybQ3e2aKtnQYmrkMPosfJcEiVn8yhR4QkYcijjh73KqxALQz1hix2 GnVCkBH073OpkZz74qmRxyLBq8nwHQ0Ep5jmW246aRldO0N541bN2y8i953OGel98uMs BdPsPtWRao6+BWNmfGbEw3sa7/nu4znLL7X0zQSbtG/wNNbNn27iFmBLVQShmXh/uv0L RI2A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:user-agent:references:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date; bh=/AxeABhVfsMK5+ygUvTYuANj+GkfTcUn1yOA8HPZRZM=; b=rWFGfRkEppiLVpWRBeS7+cGGhozIYD3DKZM75VQqCF/s1fE8sysqFHEDA602awZ3jI 8/9NVVdMETQ450/AI8FhYNVCTwYmcJqK4e0aBUJ3EiiKXkne9ZYTqLxp0Og5Ae0/0vLl vqD9jIy3/oAudmh6b25RtHR9GO/iBOqox/NW2xpHwvd3XNW+Bq61smA88Xs1VWVttzn2 1xk3FSyf1Zff/JxV8eAG6O4vSmSZ0GuEbLdl4+kZYCw00dnkRyqSo6tmTGziW68LN5p4 LhHbn5glmNXaBJNNQ3eVva/MkpL6NdvxAB4xWXa3UqRxRdTYcfHevSA0WCwwh453ho2p BnpQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1u6twDqsaTHdGlxC0gut4hSIjlv78AFe4tnA24Eyr0qdOatMdg jJTDoNJoXUocIMLr3GuQA2YGntqUxb07f1QF X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4U1beGKO+ocHsE/gdJclJI0Dcpx3BzOwFk+Htom2sSKjJsQB7CrncJAkyK3ufC4CXvBFBOJg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:596:b0:12d:91cd:cf36 with SMTP id m22-20020a056870059600b0012d91cdcf36mr3539870oap.84.1664312829551; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 14:07:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2804:14d:7e39:8470:b00c:7850:ebea:3ab6]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 2-20020a4a0102000000b004762a830156sm1063136oor.32.2022.09.27.14.07.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 14:07:09 -0700 (PDT) References: <453759b1-1ddf-1aff-a033-6183b84a4a4d@simark.ca> <674788ed-f691-447c-206d-4a4e15347d4b@arm.com> <20220927093803.7pkbrmim2o76szem@ubuntu.lan> User-agent: mu4e 1.8.9; emacs 28.1 From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: Lancelot SIX Cc: Luis Machado , Joel Brobecker , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Proposal: Add review tags to patch review workflow. In-reply-to: <20220927093803.7pkbrmim2o76szem@ubuntu.lan> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 21:07:06 +0000 Message-ID: <87leq4edc5.fsf@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hello, Lancelot SIX via Gdb writes: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 09:39:02AM +0100, Luis Machado via Gdb wrote: >> So, in summary, I see the proposal to add tags as a way to improve a pat= ch reviewing >> system that >> is not being capable of keeping up with demand. I doubt we would need su= ch tagging if we >> had a >> proper reviewing system in place (be it gerrit, patchworks or any other). >>=20 > > Hi, > > As far as I=E2=80=AFunderstand, patchwork can see the R-b and T-b tags and > update patches metadata based on that. An up-to-date patchwork instance > is available for GDB > (https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gdb/list/) and old patches > have been archived. It is in a clean state if we want to try using it > (or re-try, I believe this have been tried in the past but there were > too much limitations at the time). > > If R-b and T-b tags are being adopted, patchwork sounds like a good > candidate tool to help to monitor the patches pending review/approval. > > What is still unknown to me at the moment is how much effort does it > take to keep patchwork up-to-date with events it fails to detect (like > patches merged with minor changes). I am currently experimenting > tracking patches with it (I think Simon is too). Nothing compulsory to > anyone of course. The tool is there for those who want. The pure ML > based workflow will not be impacted with this. Having Bruno's proposal > in would certainly help. FWIW I like Bruno's proposal, it would bring clarity to the patch review and approval process. And as Lancelot mentioned, it also helps people using patchwork. Carlos O'Donell mentioned at GNU Tools Cauldron that patchwork has been very helpful for him with managing glibc patches, and that he would still use it even if no one else in that community did since it helps him keep track of the review state of the patches. --=20 Thiago