Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
To: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>,
	Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>,
	"poky@yoctoproject.org" <poky@yoctoproject.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: create-pull-request / send-pull-request updates
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 11:24:24 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DCAD458.60202@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1305135637.30391.455.camel@rex>



On 05/11/2011 10:40 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 10:01 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thoughts/Comments?
>>>
>>
>> I would suggest to alter the process a bit and get rid of the scripts
>> completely. Patches are sent to mailing list for review once reviewed
>> the final patches are
>> sent as git pull-request. It would simplify things.

I think I know where you're coming from Khem, and I don't disagree that
it would simplify things for some people. However, we have a wide range
of people working on the various portions of the project. The scripts
offer a means of standardizing how patches are reviewed and pulled, and
I think that has improved things significantly over how things were a
year ago.

With the Linux kernel, the vast majority of patches are just sent to the
list as email. Pull requests are typically sent from sub-maintainers.
However, the poky developers have long been using a pull model for many
contributors. The problem was the patches weren't ever hitting the list.
This led me to write the scripts in the first place. They attempted to
maintain the pull model which worked well for the maintainers while
still ensuring there was easy access to the patches for review.

> 
> I'd argue that it doesn't. It just means the requests come in different
> formats, sometimes with key pieces of information missing which means
> the people trying to handle the requests (like me) get frustrated.
> 
> I find it easiest to deal with requests that have come through those
> scripts.


Obviously we need to try and make things as easy as possible for the
maintainers to merge in changes. One thing I think would be painful for
maintainer with the current model, is that a pull request appears (at
least to me) to be the final version of a patch series, when in fact
they can be the very first iteration and still require review. The pull
does make it easy to do some testing of patches in addition of review
though.

I can certainly see both sides to this.


> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard
> 

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel



  reply	other threads:[~2011-05-11 18:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-11 16:15 RFC: create-pull-request / send-pull-request updates Darren Hart
2011-05-11 16:22 ` [poky] " Koen Kooi
2011-05-11 18:06   ` Darren Hart
2011-05-11 17:01 ` Khem Raj
2011-05-11 17:40   ` Richard Purdie
2011-05-11 18:24     ` Darren Hart [this message]
2011-05-12  2:43     ` Khem Raj
2011-05-11 18:35 ` Tom Rini
2011-05-12  0:49 ` Otavio Salvador

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4DCAD458.60202@linux.intel.com \
    --to=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=martin.jansa@gmail.com \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=poky@yoctoproject.org \
    --cc=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox