From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 10:16:43 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Worried about patches not being merged? In-Reply-To: References: <20150304232101.437af48f@free-electrons.com> <1426708866.1395.8.camel@embedded.rocks> Message-ID: <20150319101643.6a4eeed3@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Angelo, (Please don't use top-posting, top-posting is bad.) On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 09:35:31 +0100, Angelo Compagnucci wrote: > The first on is the impossibility to prioritize patches to be > reviewed. Nobody really cares to go to months old threads only to find > an important patch passed unobserved. We should have a way to tag that > patch as high/low priority just at the time of arrival, so reviewers > could choose in a pool of important patches. This way the project > could add important features and bug fixes more easily. > To me, it's not that important that my new shiny sysdig package will > enter buildroot in a couple of major releases, it's more important to > have the makedevs recursive option applied cause it's really a killer > feature (this is only an example from my backlog). Indeed, patchwork could offer more features to "classify" patches. There are some big series like the SELinux stuff or the per-package staging directory that are really "advanced/in-progress" work that isn't at the same level as many other patches in the list. Patchwork is an open-source project, the code base is pretty small and easy, so feel free to contribute improvements! > The second one is to have the ability to comment patches directly on > web. Nobody wants to dig his email client looking for that two months > old thread to be reviewed. Having a simple way to comment on web could > accelerate patch review considerably, cause I can filter patches > matching a certain criteria and review them one by one. I can choose > to review patches from older to younger, or patches that pertain to my > field of knowledge. On this one however I believe you'll face the opposition of many of the old timers, who are very much used to e-mail based review. I do think that e-mail based review encourages more people to review because everyone gets to see the review e-mails, it's not buried deep in an obscure web interface. And anyway, what are the available options? The Gerrit web interface is absolutely terrible, it's a huge mess of buttons/links all over the place, totally unusable IMO. What you could do however, since patchwork has the complete e-mails, is create a "Reply" button next to each patch in patchwork, that would open up the patch and format a reply to it so that you can review the patch. This would at least simplify the process of finding back in your e-mail client the relevant e-mail (which, to be honest, isn't that complicated: just copy/paste the Subject of the patch as given by patchwork into your e-mail client, and it'll return you just that one patch). Also, often people complaining about e-mail and wanting to use web-based stuff instead is because their e-mail client or e-mail setup in general sucks. Do you have a good and efficient e-mail client? If you don't, then the issue might be here. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com