From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
To: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@gotplt.org>
Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: New patchwork state: Invalid
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 06:33:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YymXFIEIsMRGT8tq@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <931e9495-092f-e3df-317d-3e674ac789a8@gotplt.org>
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 05:49:30PM -0400, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> Adhemerval, Florian and I noticed a couple of manpage patches during review
> that managed to apply to the glibc tree because they only added new files
> and as a result, didn't fail CI. I've added a new terminal state 'Invalid'
> to patchwork to mark such patches from now on. It should be used for any
> patches that don't belong to glibc, e.g. because they've been cross-posted.
I noticed this too! I asked DJ aobut his and he said it was common.
I'm OK with "Invalid" but I would rather go with "Not applicable"
because the patch is *valid* but not applicable. Total bikeshed.
> This is now separate from the 'Fails to apply' state, which was previously
> overloaded to indicate non-glibc patches.
Our maxim should be: As few states as possible.
My opinion is that we should not have "Fails to apply."
Instead the state should always be "Failed CI."
Applying a patch is a lower level operation that is related to
pre-commit CI.
The flow could be like this:
- A patchwork bot attempts to re-apply the patch, and if it fails it
creates a "fail" entry in the CI which reads "Rebase bot failed".
- A patchwork bot notices the fail and marks the patch or whole
series as "Failed CI"
My suggestion is as follows:
- Remove "Fails to apply." from the workflow. As few states as possible
should be our goal.
- Suggest renaming "Invalid" to "Not applicable" only because it sounds
kinder (complete bikeshed).
Cheers,
Carlos.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-20 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-19 21:49 Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-09-20 10:33 ` Carlos O'Donell [this message]
2022-09-20 12:08 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YymXFIEIsMRGT8tq@fedora \
--to=carlos@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=siddhesh@gotplt.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).