Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] doc: End transition period.

[Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>]

On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 02:52:48PM -0800, Antonio Argenziano wrote:
> 
> 
> On 05/02/19 14:18, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > igt-dev is pretty established after a 1-year transition.
> > 
> > Let's end the transition and avoid confusion.
> > 
> > Cc: Easwar Hariharan <easwar.hariharan@intel.com>
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > Cc: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> > ---
> >   CONTRIBUTING.md | 18 ------------------
> >   autogen.sh      |  3 ---
> >   meson.sh        |  2 --
> >   3 files changed, 23 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md
> > index 27c8e796..c2169375 100644
> > --- a/CONTRIBUTING.md
> > +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md
> > @@ -10,24 +10,6 @@ A short list of contribution guidelines:
> >         Development mailing list for IGT GPU Tools <igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>
> > -  For a transition period patches are accepted on both the igt-dev mailing list
> > -  and the former intel-gfx mailing list (with the appropriate patch
> > -  subjectprefix, see below).
> > -
> > -  During the transition period, feel free to send patches to both lists if you
> > -  have a need to do so, as they will get deduplicated so they only appear and
> > -  are tested in one Patchwork instance.
> > -
> > -      Intel GFX discussion <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
> > -
> > -  Please use --subject-prefix="PATCH i-g-t" so IGT patches are easily
> > -  identified in the massive amount mails on intel-gfx. To ensure this is always
> > -  done, meson.sh (and autogen.sh) will run:
> > -
> > -      git config format.subjectprefix "PATCH i-g-t"
> 
> IIRC, the agreement was that patches will still be sent to intel-gfx if they
> affect the driver. So, keeping the prefix would still be useful.

I was thinking on a v2, but I got confused myself. What would be an igt patch
that affects the driver vs on that doesn't affect?

I thought that igt-dev had 2 goals:
  - detach igt fro intel and increase other contributions
  - minimize the flow on intel-gfx

But maybe I was wrong about the second one?

This is an honest attempt to understand the goals than we can write the more
appropriated text. With the current transition text I understand that we
wanted to avoid igt patches on intel-gfx, but if we write in a way that
all intel related changes go to both mailing lists we might loose that objective.

So please share your thoughts...

Petri?

Thanks,
Rodrigo.

> 
> Antonio
> 
> > -
> > -  on its first invocation.
> > -
> >   - igt-gpu-tools is MIT licensed and we require contributions to follow the
> >     developer's certificate of origin: http://developercertificate.org/
> > diff --git a/autogen.sh b/autogen.sh
> > index 65fcab2f..55764070 100755
> > --- a/autogen.sh
> > +++ b/autogen.sh
> > @@ -9,9 +9,6 @@ cd $srcdir
> >   autoreconf -v --install || exit 1
> >   cd $ORIGDIR || exit $?
> > -git config --local --get format.subjectPrefix >/dev/null 2>&1 ||
> > -    git config --local format.subjectPrefix "PATCH i-g-t"
> > -
> >   if test -z "$NOCONFIGURE"; then
> >           $srcdir/configure "$@"
> >   fi
> > diff --git a/meson.sh b/meson.sh
> > index 7cf9d4a3..3d5d8e9a 100755
> > --- a/meson.sh
> > +++ b/meson.sh
> > @@ -35,6 +35,4 @@ docs:
> >   EOF
> > -git config format.subjectprefix "PATCH i-g-t"
> > -
> >   make $@
> > 
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev