[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Karl O. Pinc]

Hi,

As a beginner here I have to say it's really
surprising the way the list disappears patches
sent to the list.  Usually when you send an email
you expect it to be delivered.

I'm sure you have your reasons for this behavior
but I thought I'd comment anyway.

As a suggestion, if the patch won't go to the list
for comment perhaps there's a way to send an
ack back to the sender to let them know what
will happen next?

Regards,

Karl <kop@meme.com>
Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
                 -- Robert A. Heinlein

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Andy Sharp]

I think it's a matter of the list software isn't sending emails to the
original sender, regardless of the setting for that user.  The same
happened to me with a patch set I sent on Wednesday.  They all went to the
list, based on looking in the online archive, even though I never got those
emails in my own mailbox.  I also got a couple of weird bounces ...
something about it being a moderated list for about half of the six emails.
 Weird.

I see several patches from you over recent days, including the
re-submissions, so my guess is the same is happening to you.

Cheers,

a


On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Karl O. Pinc <kop@meme.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> As a beginner here I have to say it's really
> surprising the way the list disappears patches
> sent to the list.  Usually when you send an email
> you expect it to be delivered.
>
> I'm sure you have your reasons for this behavior
> but I thought I'd comment anyway.
>
> As a suggestion, if the patch won't go to the list
> for comment perhaps there's a way to send an
> ack back to the sender to let them know what
> will happen next?
>
> Regards,
>
> Karl <kop@meme.com>
> Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
>                  -- Robert A. Heinlein
>
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
>

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Karl O. Pinc]

On 08/03/2012 03:43:50 PM, Andy Sharp wrote:
> I think it's a matter of the list software isn't sending emails to 
> the
> original sender, regardless of the setting for that user.  

It seems only to affect patches sent to the list, not regular
emails like this one.  I don't think it has to do with the
client.  git send-email --compose sent a patch and a message
and I got the message back on the list but not the patch.

> I see several patches from you over recent days, including the
> re-submissions, so my guess is the same is happening to you.

Cool.  Thanks for the ack.



Karl <kop@meme.com>
Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
                 -- Robert A. Heinlein

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Graeme Russ]

Hi Karl & Andy,

On 08/04/2012 06:43 AM, Andy Sharp wrote:
> I think it's a matter of the list software isn't sending emails to the
> original sender, regardless of the setting for that user.  The same
> happened to me with a patch set I sent on Wednesday.  They all went to the
> list, based on looking in the online archive, even though I never got those

If you see your email in the archive and/or patchwork (note only patches
and comments on patches will make it into patchwork - also that Patchwork
will drop patches containing 'funny (non-ASCII)' characters) then the list
is processing it correctly.

We are currently looking into a home-brew patchwork replacement to augment
how we process patches via the mailing list. Comments are appreciated:

http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/U-Boot/ToolsPatchTracking

> emails in my own mailbox.  I also got a couple of weird bounces ...
> something about it being a moderated list for about half of the six emails.
>  Weird.

emails over, I think, about 100kB need approval before being forwarded to
the list. Wolfgang, since these appear to be rather rare, can this limit be
dropped, at least for a little while to test the impact?

> I see several patches from you over recent days, including the
> re-submissions, so my guess is the same is happening to you.

So do I - big thanks for the documentation updates, they all too often get
overlooked.

Regards,

Graeme

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> a
> 
> 
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Karl O. Pinc <kop@meme.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> As a beginner here I have to say it's really
>> surprising the way the list disappears patches
>> sent to the list.  Usually when you send an email
>> you expect it to be delivered.
>>
>> I'm sure you have your reasons for this behavior
>> but I thought I'd comment anyway.
>>
>> As a suggestion, if the patch won't go to the list
>> for comment perhaps there's a way to send an
>> ack back to the sender to let them know what
>> will happen next?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Karl <kop@meme.com>
>> Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
>>                  -- Robert A. Heinlein
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> U-Boot mailing list
>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
>> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
> 

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Graeme Russ,

In message <501C4672.7060003@gmail.com> you wrote:
> 
> emails over, I think, about 100kB need approval before being forwarded to
> the list. Wolfgang, since these appear to be rather rare, can this limit be
> dropped, at least for a little while to test the impact?

I see no reason to drop the limit.  Moderation takes place several
times per day; nobody ever complained to me that his message got
delayed for too long.

> > I see several patches from you over recent days, including the
> > re-submissions, so my guess is the same is happening to you.
> 
> So do I - big thanks for the documentation updates, they all too often get
> overlooked.

I have no diea why there are two people (Karl and Any) appear to have
problems with list delivery - I cannot see any such problems.  As far
as I can tell, all their messages have been properly delivered to the
list and the archives.  I tend to believe these are local problems
on their own end, but without precise error reports I don;t ieen have
a clue what to look for.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
If all the Chinese simultaneously jumped into the Pacific  off  a  10
foot platform erected 10 feet off their coast, it would cause a tidal
wave that would destroy everything in this country west of Nebraska.

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Karl O. Pinc]

On 08/03/2012 05:46:56 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> I have no diea why there are two people (Karl and Any) appear to have
> problems with list delivery - I cannot see any such problems.  As far
> as I can tell, all their messages have been properly delivered to the
> list and the archives.  I tend to believe these are local problems
> on their own end, but without precise error reports I don;t ieen have
> a clue what to look for.

The trouble is getting a patch message back from the list when you
send a patch in.  For example I sent
<1344017124-5749-1-git-send-email-kop@meme.com>
[PATCH v2] README: Add handy kermit primer
The mail logs show the message going out, but nothing
ever comes back with that message id.
(Of course I don't see the message id if my
system rejects the inbound message, but why
would it reject just my patches from the list?)

Perhaps it's because git send-email automatically cc-s me,
so the list decides not to send the patch back?
I've added myself as a cc to this message to see
if that matters.

In any case it's not a big deal.  It's just, odd.
If you really care you can look at your logs
and watch the above message id come in and
what happens to it.

Regards,

Karl <kop@meme.com>
Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
                 -- Robert A. Heinlein

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Karl,

In message <1344041771.12337.2@mofo> you wrote:
>
> The trouble is getting a patch message back from the list when you
> send a patch in.  For example I sent

Why would you want to get your own messages back?  You already know
what you sent, don't you?   

> <1344017124-5749-1-git-send-email-kop@meme.com>
> [PATCH v2] README: Add handy kermit primer

Yes, and as you can see for example from the list archive at gmane
that has been properly deliverd; also your V2 of it:

08/03 "Karl O. Pinc"     [U-Boot] [PATCH] README: Add handy kermit primer
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/136913

08/03 "Karl O. Pinc"     [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] README: Add handy kermit primer
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/136919

> The mail logs show the message going out, but nothing
> ever comes back with that message id.

Why should it?

> Perhaps it's because git send-email automatically cc-s me,
> so the list decides not to send the patch back?
> I've added myself as a cc to this message to see
> if that matters.

Your registration in the mailing list has the "nodupes" flag set,
which is documented as:

	Avoid duplicate copies of messages?

	When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a
	list message, you can opt to not receive another copy from the
	mailing list. Select Yes to avoid receiving copies from the
	mailing list; select No to receive copies.

	If the list has member personalized messages enabled, and you
	elect to receive copies, every copy will have a
	X-Mailman-Copy: yes header added to it. 

You selected that you don't want dupes, so you should not complain
that you don't get dupes.

> In any case it's not a big deal.  It's just, odd.

It is the configuration you selected. If you don't like it, then go
to the list page, click on "edit options", and change your settings.
Most people prefer it tis way, though.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
When all is said and done, more is said than done.

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Karl O. Pinc]

Dear Wolfgang,

On 08/04/2012 08:35:49 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> In message <1344041771.12337.2@mofo> you wrote:
> >
> > The trouble is getting a patch message back from the list when you
> > send a patch in.  For example I sent
> 
> Why would you want to get your own messages back?  You already know
> what you sent, don't you?   

Because I always get all my own messages back, except for patches.
Duplicate elimination is different from whether the list
sends you back your own messages.

> 
> > <1344017124-5749-1-git-send-email-kop@meme.com>
> > [PATCH v2] README: Add handy kermit primer
> 
> Yes, and as you can see for example from the list archive at gmane
> that has been properly deliverd; also your V2 of it:

Yes.  That was never an issue.  (I can see how you might think
it is an issue.  People say their messages "do not go to the list"
because they look in their email inbox and do not see the list sending
them the message.)

> > The mail logs show the message going out, but nothing
> > ever comes back with that message id.
> 
> Why should it?

See above.

> 
> > Perhaps it's because git send-email automatically cc-s me,
> > so the list decides not to send the patch back?
> > I've added myself as a cc to this message to see
> > if that matters.
> 
> Your registration in the mailing list has the "nodupes" flag set,
> which is documented as:
> 
> 	Avoid duplicate copies of messages?
> 
> 	When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a
> 	list message, you can opt to not receive another copy from the
> 	mailing list. Select Yes to avoid receiving copies from the
> 	mailing list; select No to receive copies.
> 
> 	If the list has member personalized messages enabled, and you
> 	elect to receive copies, every copy will have a
> 	X-Mailman-Copy: yes header added to it. 
> 
> You selected that you don't want dupes, so you should not complain
> that you don't get dupes.

Ah, but I didn't "select" this configuration.  I got 
the default configuration without ever knowing what I got.

> 
> > In any case it's not a big deal.  It's just, odd.
> 
> It is the configuration you selected. If you don't like it, then go
> to the list page, click on "edit options", and change your settings.
> Most people prefer it tis way, though.

Really, it's more of a problem with _git_ on my end always cc-ing
me.  Although duplicate elimination on the list side makes sense
it the combination of this default and git's behavior that
makes for never-before-seen behavior that leads to questions.
After all, how often is it that I cc myself when sending
email to a list?  (If ever, I'd bcc.)   It's git's cc-ing
that's introducing a new factor and making odd things happen.

Come to think of it, most (all?) of the lists I'm subscribed
to have duplicate elimination turned off by default.
Now that I think of it
I was also surprised when my conversations with others
that cc-ed the list did not show up on the list -- to be
precise, _I_ was not able to see them show up on the list
by looking at my email inbox.  But that didn't really
raise alarm bells in the same way that sending patches
and then not "seeing" them on the list raises alarms.
Patches represent real work and when they seem to
disappear it's disconcerting.  Because of the moderation
delay (maybe?) by the time u-boot messages start showing up
in my inbox I've already forgotten about the cc-ed conversation;
but patches are memorable.

So perhaps the u-boot list default that has
duplicate elimination turned on,
where other lists do not, is factor contributing 
to the confusion.  I've never had
to think about configuring my list subscriptions.
I send email; the list delivers the email to all it's
recipients, including me.  The operation is very transparent.
When things did not work that way on the u-boot list
it raised questions.  My very first post was a patch.
It took me about a month to realize that the patch was
received by the rest of the list and by then I'd
already re-sent it.

If I had confusion and Andy had confusion there
must also have been some other people in the past
who didn't speak up who had confusion too.

Anyway, problem solved.  We know what's happening,
what happened, and why.  You can decide if there's
any sort of issue that you want to address by
frobbing defaults on your end.

I hope this has been more helpful than annoying.

Regards,

Karl <kop@meme.com>
Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
                 -- Robert A. Heinlein

P.S.  As long as we're on the subject of the list,
the moderation delay was initially confusing when
sending in my first post.  (My first post
was actually 2 emails, sent by 
git send-email --compose, so was 2 emails:
a patch and a regular email.  The regular
email was, after delay, sent back to me by the list,
the patch was not.)  No getting around the moderation
delay, just thought I'd mention it.  Perhaps you could
alter the list welcome message to note that the
list is moderated.  This won't help; nobody
reads the instructions.  :/  But at least you'll
have something to point to if anybody complains.

P.P.S. It occurs to me that it might be less confusing
if the list default was to not send emails back to
the original sender, as well as having duplicate
elimination turned on.  This seems to me to be
more consistent -- you never get messages you
otherwise see.  I can't say I like this as a default,
I'm just saying it would be a more consistent user interface.
It would not violate the principal of least surprise
by treating messages potentially seen because of cc differently
from messages seen otherwise.

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Karl,

In message <1344099312.12337.4@mofo> you wrote:
> 
> the patch was not.)  No getting around the moderation
> delay, just thought I'd mention it.  Perhaps you could
> alter the list welcome message to note that the
> list is moderated.  This won't help; nobody
> reads the instructions.  :/  But at least you'll
> have something to point to if anybody complains.

This makes no sense - you will get a welcome message only after
subscribing, and moderation hol;ds only posting of unsubscribed
senders.  Once you are subscribed, your messages go through unfiltered
(except if they are too big or get caught by the spam filters).

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
If you use modules, you pay the price. Sane embedded solutions
running in "tight" environments don't use modules :-)
    -- Benjamin Herrenschmidt in <1258234866.2140.451.camel@pasglop>

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Alexander Holler]

Am 04.08.2012 18:55, schrieb Karl O. Pinc:

> So perhaps the u-boot list default that has
> duplicate elimination turned on,
> where other lists do not, is factor contributing
> to the confusion.  I've never had

Some mail-servers have that feature enabled by default too. E.g. 
cyrus-imapd (called duplicate delivery suppression there). So if you get 
a mail by cc and from a list, usually the one from list doesn't show up 
because it is delivered after the cc'ed one.

Regards,

Alexander

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Karl O. Pinc]

On 08/04/2012 08:35:49 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> Your registration in the mailing list has the "nodupes" flag set,
> which is documented as:
> 
> 	Avoid duplicate copies of messages?
> 
> 	When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a
> 	list message, you can opt to not receive another copy from the
> 	mailing list. Select Yes to avoid receiving copies from the
> 	mailing list; select No to receive copies.
> 
> 	If the list has member personalized messages enabled, and you
> 	elect to receive copies, every copy will have a
> 	X-Mailman-Copy: yes header added to it. 
> 
> You selected that you don't want dupes, so you should not complain
> that you don't get dupes.

FYI.  I got the above message twice.  Probably because you
sent the message To: me and Cc:-ed the list instead of
sending the message To: the list and cc:-ing me.



Karl <kop@meme.com>
Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
                 -- Robert A. Heinlein

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Karl O. Pinc]

On 08/04/2012 11:58:23 AM, Karl O. Pinc wrote:

> FYI.  I got the above message twice.  Probably because you
> sent the message To: me and Cc:-ed the list instead of
> sending the message To: the list and cc:-ing me.

No. I am wrong.  I was confused.  :-P  

Sorry.



Karl <kop@meme.com>
Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
                 -- Robert A. Heinlein

[U-Boot] The way the list manages patch submission

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Karl,

I wrote:

> It is the configuration you selected. If you don't like it, then go
> to the list page, click on "edit options", and change your settings.
> Most people prefer it tis way, though.

While you are at it, check if you want to enable the "Receive your own
posts to the list?" as well...

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
"Life sucks, but it's better than the alternative."
- Peter da Silva