From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bumble.maple.relay.mailchannels.net (bumble.maple.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.214.25]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 378713860C39 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 06:36:22 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 378713860C39 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gotplt.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=siddhesh@gotplt.org X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|siddhesh@gotplt.org Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBD97121EDC; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 06:36:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a35.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-16-27.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.16.27]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4BFF2121E4E; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 06:36:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|siddhesh@gotplt.org Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a35.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 100.96.16.27 (trex/6.1.1); Thu, 11 Mar 2021 06:36:20 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|siddhesh@gotplt.org X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Snatch-Celery: 1d42bc5e2d4eba1c_1615444580522_4232796637 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1615444580522:1854988450 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1615444580521 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a35.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a35.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F6057E3F3; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 22:36:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gotplt.org; h=subject:to :cc:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=gotplt.org; bh=E0SDsy nKPI9abjrmBu7eedcngIo=; b=qdEeqKTEy1Y/C0jWmUJElXS+6tYNYNEpnOccVt 11Bv6PtMT+YcLr4JbrRiuH0T1ouMjBbyfnVdBaW8CEzOzKGz2h/EfbTLlChRugol 42e4ffYSW+xlKHXyJd2RrHBsMCLTLNWx33hvISHKz7eVaFv8ThYdgKGhoWbyhGJw TTzZw= Received: from [192.168.1.111] (unknown [1.186.101.110]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: siddhesh@gotplt.org) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a35.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 854378088C; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 22:36:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [RFC] Auto-posting committed patches to this list? To: DJ Delorie Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org References: X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a35 From: Siddhesh Poyarekar Message-ID: <415836a4-4a99-45bb-62b2-d088fde2ac8e@gotplt.org> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 12:06:12 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3030.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 06:36:23 -0000 On 3/11/21 10:03 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: > > How much of the problem space would be solved if we only emailed commit > "patches" directly to the patchwork system? And how difficult would it > be to get patchwork to properly match independent commit mails to > existing patch series? > Currently the matching logic depends on a checksum based on the diff part of the patch with the diff part of the commit. There are some limitations in patchwork email parsing because of which on occasion it doesn't read the diff correctly, but it largely works. In general, patches sent using git-send-email are parsed correctly and should result in correct matching. There are two problems I'm trying to solve, one is of 1:1 correspondence between patchwork state and repo state and that will be solved by feeding commit patches directly to patchwork. The other problem is visibility of commits that don't match mailing list content. We allow, as part of policy, trivial changes to patches before they're committed but ideally one should always post the final version before commit. We enforce this ideal case for patches that only contain trivial changes. Having commits that don't match any existing patches in patchwork be posted on the mailing list for visibility plugs this gap, giving us confidence that every commit that went into the repo was at at least one point advertised on the list. Siddhesh