Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Allowing something Change-Id (or something like it) in kernel commits

Sean Paul
2019-08-23T15:31:50Z

On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:18 AM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 09:15:30AM -0400, Sean Paul wrote:
> > Only if you've uploaded the patch somewhere before sending it to the
> > mailing list. I think this would satisfy the Gerrit crowd, since
> > they're presumably uploading the patch to Gerrit, getting some review
> > on it and then sending it upstream. They will have a link. If you're
> > just interested in being archival tool friendly, you probably just
> > want to add some uuid cookie to the patch and post it directly to the
> > mailing list.
>
> And this is why I think something like one of the two:
>
> Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/c/1158
> Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/q/I3268f9036512c4378cde1da37e0612b43ed4d384
>
> ... is a better choice.
>

Agreed. If you have a url for the patch this makes sense.

I don't upload my patches to Gerrit, but I am interested in enabling
patchwork (or equivalent tool) to do a better job of tracking revision
changes.

Currently I just link to all past revisions in the latest one (see
[1]) so folks can see the prior discussion. It'd be nice if there was
an easier way of achieving this.

Sean

[1]- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=1452c25b0e60278820f3d2155c65f1bfcce5ee79

> The Link tag, unlike the Change-Id: hidden amongst the diffstat,
> allows any patch review comments which are made via Gerrit to be
> accessible to the public. The main reason why I suggested the first
> as opposed to the second initially is that one of the pushbacks
> against the "Change-Id: " header was that the
> "I3268f9036512c4378cde1da37e0612b43ed4d384" portion was ugly.
>
> Yes, that's purely an aesthetics argument, but in terms of human
> emotional acceptance, that's important. The first is arguably better
> than:
>
> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200847
>
> ... which people are already willing to accept.
>
> There are some advantages to the second, in that we don't have to
> contact Gerrit to assign the small integer number. Either way,
> though, it should easy to teach Gerrit how to interpret either instead
> of the "Change-Id:" tag, and for publically accessible Gerrit
> instances, the Link: tag is strictly superior. It allows you to know
> which Gerrit server to contact to find the review history, and it
> becomes obvious whether that Gerrit server is publicaly accessible, or
> if it is hidden behind a corporate firewall.
>
> Cheers,
>
> - Ted