Re: [X-POST] patchwork.sourceware.org refresh

[Carlos O'Donell <codonell@redhat.com>]

On 11/28/19 12:47 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On 28/11/19 10:55 am, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>>  Well, I've been using it to track the state my own patches submitted (and 
>> during the period of my active MIPS GDB port maintenance also for other 
>> people's submissions).
> 
> Can you please take a snapshot of your state?
> 
>>  Is it actually necessary to destroy all the recorded state (not only for 
>> patches, but also for e-mail accounts linked, which AFAIK cannot be 
>> restored once you've lost access to any) just for an engine upgrade?  
>> That would be an odd requirement and ISTR at least one of the patchworks 
>> I've had an account with to have been seamlessly upgraded at one point.
> 
> Hmm, I will try to do an in-place upgrade without actually deleting
> anything.  I can't promise that it will go well because we'll be
> upgrading from a very ancient version and I don't know right now if the
> schema has changed incompatibly.
> 
> I'll do a backup too FWIW.

When I looked at this the upgrade was *very* complicated, and carrying over
the data from a version that is so old was going to be hard.

>>  Or do you have something else, i.e. not just an upgrade, in mind?
> 
> To begin with, I intend to add hooks to close patchwork patches on merge
> so that that aspect is automated.  It was the one problem we had with
> patchwork and with ChangeLogs gone in glibc, we're definitely a lot more
> likely to get close to that goal.

Agreed!

For me as a reviewer, knowing what's up-to-date and ready for review,
having a tool (like pwclient) to pull the patch and build a local branch
from it, and then being able to use local diff tooling is really the key
things to accelerate patch review for patches that don't require complex
consensus.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.