Do we need a patch queue (Patchwork)?

Do we need a patch queue (Patchwork)?

[Paul Menzel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1478 bytes --]

Dear OE folks,


(This is the last organizational message I will write today.)

We currently have a patch queue/tracker called Patchwork [1][2] which
should be used according to the documentation in the Wiki.

The current situation though is that nobody seems to use it anymore, i.
e. does not update the patch state. (Also because of some problems with
registration.)

Before the move to oe-core and meta-oe there were some people caring
about Patchwork and going through the uncommitted each quarter or so.
Currently this is not the case anymore.

Should the system be shut down or do we still need it?

### benefits ###

1. Patches are easy to apply from Patchwork when not having access to
the email program with the list inbox.
2. Old patches are not forgotten.
3. Patch state can be tracked and the thread representation is more
concise then the list archive.
4. Searching for patches on the Web most of the time the first hits
point to the threads in Patchwork.

### downsides ###

1. It is a lot of work to update the patch state manually.
2. A lot of people refuse to use it.


We could also say that the current installation will stay at is and that
it is only used to import patches easily and for getting the discussion
overview. I am fine with that, but the documentation needs to be
updated!


Thanks,

Paul


[1] http://patches.openembedded.org/project/oe/list/
[2] http://openembedded.org/index.php?title=Patchwork

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: Do we need a patch queue (Patchwork)?

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Op 15-09-11 12:32, Paul Menzel schreef:
> Dear OE folks,
> 
> 
> (This is the last organizational message I will write today.)
> 
> We currently have a patch queue/tracker called Patchwork [1][2] which 
> should be used according to the documentation in the Wiki.
> 
> The current situation though is that nobody seems to use it anymore, i. 
> e. does not update the patch state. (Also because of some problems with 
> registration.)

I do use it for meta-oe and if you have a look at
http://patches.openembedded.org/project/oe/list/?q=meta-oe you'll see that
it is quite up to date.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFOcdb7MkyGM64RGpERAmk5AJsEVuE99T8PGGtJOLxlgHutrdadMgCfW2xS
CW3FXF0uwPzDc1pwHn36hvQ=
=2uis
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Do we need a patch queue (Patchwork)?

[Paul Menzel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 806 bytes --]

Am Donnerstag, den 15.09.2011, 12:44 +0200 schrieb Koen Kooi:
> Op 15-09-11 12:32, Paul Menzel schreef:
> > Dear OE folks,
> > 
> > 
> > (This is the last organizational message I will write today.)
> > 
> > We currently have a patch queue/tracker called Patchwork [1][2] which 
> > should be used according to the documentation in the Wiki.
> > 
> > The current situation though is that nobody seems to use it anymore, i. 
> > e. does not update the patch state. (Also because of some problems with 
> > registration.)
> 
> I do use it for meta-oe and if you have a look at
> http://patches.openembedded.org/project/oe/list/?q=meta-oe you'll see that
> it is quite up to date.

Indeed. I am sorry for not noticing. How can you update the states? Are
you an admin?


Thanks,

Paul

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: Do we need a patch queue (Patchwork)?

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Op 15-09-11 13:01, Paul Menzel schreef:
> Am Donnerstag, den 15.09.2011, 12:44 +0200 schrieb Koen Kooi:
>> Op 15-09-11 12:32, Paul Menzel schreef:
>>> Dear OE folks,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> (This is the last organizational message I will write today.)
>>> 
>>> We currently have a patch queue/tracker called Patchwork [1][2] which
>>>  should be used according to the documentation in the Wiki.
>>> 
>>> The current situation though is that nobody seems to use it anymore,
>>> i. e. does not update the patch state. (Also because of some problems
>>> with registration.)
>> 
>> I do use it for meta-oe and if you have a look at 
>> http://patches.openembedded.org/project/oe/list/?q=meta-oe you'll see
>> that it is quite up to date.
> 
> Indeed. I am sorry for not noticing. How can you update the states? Are 
> you an admin?

I was in the previous install, not sure if I can admin it, but I can change
any patch status I want.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFOcfa6MkyGM64RGpERAlPQAKCXt89TF1MtS5RiskXdqYVdm8t4DgCgkjao
BsRrUcrBr08ndOh8Q409hKI=
=Gdr/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Do we need a patch queue (Patchwork)?

[Sebastian Krzyszkowiak]

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:32, Paul Menzel
<paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> 1. It is a lot of work to update the patch state manually.
> 2. A lot of people refuse to use it.

What about modyfiing patchwork so patches could be marked as accepted via email?
For instance, when dev is sending message "Applied and pushed,
thanks!" he could also insert some tag "#patchwork:done" or something
like that at the beginning so it would be automatically marked as
done.

Something like that (but much more complex) is working on Debian
maillists regarding bugtracker.

-- 
Sebastian Krzyszkowiak
dos