Re: Discussion: Moving away from Patchwork for Intel i915/Xe CI

[Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>]

On Wed, 05 Mar 2025, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 07:52:31PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>There's a small catch here. Patchwork is currently more clever about
>
> for some notion of clever. Try giving this kind of feedback in the
> mailing list:
>
> "oh, in addition to what you did, you also need this:
>
> ----8<----
> <diff>
> ----8<----"
>
> It will a) mangle the author for the entire series b) not do right thing
> with the patch and the series won't apply anymore (afair it tries to
> replace the patch with what you gave as diff). Also, what should go in
> the subject? Is it v{n}, v{n+1} or v{n}.1? There may be an answer, not
> documented anywhere, but for me relying on "this is what b4 does" rather
> than a specific behavior in this forked patchwork instance is much
> better.  At least with b4 we can set expectations or have hope of
> eventually tweaking it.

Agreed.

And as Konstantin noted, b4 already does better than what I claimed
(maybe I need to upgrade).


BR,
Jani.


-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel