Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:25:12 +0000
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:

> On 16 February 2018 at 11:18, Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > for 2.13 (or whatever it will be called), I'd like to switch to a
> > submaintainer model for s390x, where maintainers for a certain s390x
> > area (including myself) send me pull requests that I integrate into
> > s390-next resp. s390-fixes, for which I send a pull request to merge
> > into master.
> >
> > The problem here is that I don't want these sub pull requests to be
> > picked up by Peter's scripts, generating confusion. So far, my ideas
> > have been:
> >
> > - Post s390 pull requests only to qemu-s390x@nongnu.org. This sucks, as
> >   it makes part of the process intransparent to any QEMU developer not
> >   subscribed to that mailing list.
> > - Put a certain marker into the subject, like "PULL *s390x*" or so. I'm
> >   not sure how robust that is.
> > - Ditch the pull request idea, keep applying patches. This is not quite
> >   as bad as it sounds, as I have the infrastructure to apply patches
> >   anyway, but it hides the real workflow (and simply pulling is likely
> >   less work for me in the long run.)  
> 
> The block folks are already doing this, so we should just
> formalize what they're doing at the moment I guess. From my point
> of view as long as there's something I can easily filter
> in/out in the email body or subject so I don't get confused
> (and which doesn't require me to update my filters every time
> a new subsystem switches to using submaintainer pulls!)
> I don't mind about the rest of it. Maybe a subject line with
> 'PULL SUBSYSTEM s390x' (ditto block, etc etc) ?

Yes, "PULL SUBSYSTEM <subsys>" looks reasonable.