From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48449 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PiPIt-0001vz-FV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 05:42:19 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1PiPBD-0002nm-UE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 05:34:20 -0500
Received: from mail-gx0-f173.google.com ([209.85.161.173]:55278)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1PiPBD-0002nT-OY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 05:34:19 -0500
Received: by gxk28 with SMTP id 28so596077gxk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 02:34:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4D41479D.4060809@gnu.org>
References: <4D4124F2.7060407@gnu.org>
	<20110127101848.GC19191@stefanha-thinkpad.localdomain>
	<4D41479D.4060809@gnu.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 10:34:18 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTinSJ-ABU7dEEiHuuWQrvNf_w3rMXOacnPaVh3mO@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Fwd: Proposal: Improving patch tracking and review
	using Rietveld
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org> wrote:
> On 01/27/2011 11:19 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 08:55:30AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>
>>> Forwarding this from the GCC mailing list. =A0Since patchwork isn't
>>> more than a mail archive the way it's implemented in QEMU, this may
>>> be a more interesting possibility.
>>
>> What features are you looking for beyond archiving?
>
> Well, you pretty much nailed it.

Glad we're on the same page.  I wanted to see if you are looking for
code review or patch tracking.

I actually like the code review process used today - inline patches to
the mailing list.  It's hard to add value to that without making it
more cumbersome.

But patch tracking is definitely lacking and would benefit from
something that aggregates and presents an accurate view of the state
of unapplied patches.

Stefan