Re: automation: Creating a patchwork instance to improve pre-commit build testing

From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>,
	Iurii Artemenko <Iurii_Artemenko@epam.com>,
	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com>,
	Minios-devel <minios-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	committers@xenproject.org,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	Matt Spencer <Matt.Spencer@arm.com>
Subject: Re: automation: Creating a patchwork instance to improve pre-commit build testing
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:43:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180724094352.bobqiacujy4tgcp4@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5B56F2BB02000078001D7130@prv1-mh.provo.novell.com>

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 03:34:51AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 24.07.18 at 11:24, <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 03:06:08AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 23.07.18 at 18:40, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
> >> > # How does this impact me?
> >> > The contribution workflow is *not* impacted by this change, but once up and 
> > 
> >> > running the following will happen once you post a patch or patch series to 
> >> > xen-devel:
> >> > * Patchwork will take patch series from the mailing list and applies it
> >> > * CI/DC testing is triggered
> >> > * A test report will be sent as a mail to the patch or the series (aka the 00 patch of the series)
> >> > 
> >> > This does mean though that series which do not build or show other issues, 
> >> > will likely not be reviewed until the tests pass. This would lessen the 
> >> > burden on reviewers, as they will know whether the code submitted builds on a 
> >> > wide array of environments. 
> >> 
> >> So how are dependencies between series intended to be dealt with? It
> >> is not uncommon for someone to say "applies only on top of xyz". The
> >> implication of "will likely not be reviewed until the tests pass" seems
> >> unsuitable to me in such a case.
> >> 
> > 
> > We have been asking everyone to rebase to staging before posting a new
> > version for a long time.  It is natural for the bot to assume that
> > everything should apply on top of staging. That would provide most value
> > to the community.
> > 
> > For special cases like you just mention, we should aim to provide
> > mechanisms to manually appoint a branch to be tested.
> 
> I'm afraid I disagree again: Tools used should not be dictated. I'm
> using quilt, not git for my work, and hence I don't maintain any
> branches anywhere.

Alright.

First, I don't think I said that only git would be supported.
Git is the most prevalent VCS nowadays, and most developers use it, so
it would make sense to support it first.  If you want quilt, we can
certainly look into that. But I'm afraid if you don't say what you
specifically need, nothing can be done in that regard.

Second, it is up to individual whether they want to use a certain tool
or not. If you don't want to use this infrastructure for whatever
reason, that's OK. You're only missing out all the work in the community
has done, but you should be able to use your own workflow just fine.

Wei.

> 
> Jan
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel