Re: [docs] [PATCH 3/4] contributor-guide: discourage marking patches as Inappropriate

[Roland Hieber <rhi@pengutronix.de>]

On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 04:19:11PM +0200, Michael Opdenacker via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
> 
> On 20.09.23 at 12:06, Roland Hieber wrote:
> > It was never really clear what all those reasons really meant, and every
> > patch submitted upstream liftens the maintenance on the Yocto side.
> > So remove the current list, and replace it with two reasons in which an
> > upstream submission likely won't benefit the upstream project.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex.kanavin@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Roland Hieber <rhi@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> >   .../contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst  | 30 +++++++++----------
> >   1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/documentation/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst b/documentation/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst
> > index 4faadcd122d8..bc14c58a9759 100644
> > --- a/documentation/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst
> > +++ b/documentation/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst
> > @@ -299,22 +299,20 @@ following status strings:
> >   ``Inappropriate [reason]``
> >      The patch is not appropriate for upstream, include a brief reason on the
> > -   same line enclosed with ``[]``. The reason can be:
> > -
> > -   -  ``not author`` (you are not the author and do not intend to upstream this,
> > -      the source must be listed in the comments)
> > -   -  ``native``
> > -   -  ``licensing``
> > -   -  ``configuration``
> > -   -  ``enable feature``
> > -   -  ``disable feature``
> > -   -  ``bugfix`` (add bug URL here)
> > -   -  ``embedded specific``
> > -   -  ``other`` (give details in comments)
> > -
> > -The various ``Inappropriate [reason]`` status items are meant to indicate that
> > -the person responsible for adding this patch to the system does not intend to
> > -upstream the patch for a specific reason.
> > +   same line enclosed with ``[]``. In the past, there were several different
> > +   reasons not to submit patches upstream, but we have to consider that every
> > +   non-upstreamed patch means a maintainance burden for recipe maintainers.
> > +   Currently, the only reasons to mark patches as inappropriate for upstream
> > +   submission are:
> > +
> > +   -  ``oe specific``: the issue is specific to how Yocto performs builds
> > +      or sets things up at runtime, and can be resolved only with a patch that
> > +      is not however relevant or appropriate for general upstream submission.
> > +   - ``upstream ticket <link>``: the issue is not Yocto-specific and should be
> > +      fixed upstream, but the patch in its current form is not suitable for
> > +      merging upstream, and the author lacks sufficient expertise to develope a
> > +      proper patch. Instead the issue is handled via a bug report (include
> > +      link).
> 
> 
> There is a formatting issue here: the second line (starting with "fixed
> upstream") has an extra leading space compared to the first one, and this
> messes-up the way the paragraph is rendered. Check by yourself ;-)

Oh indeed. I'll chalk that up to not enough coffee… :-> Thanks for
catching it!

 - Roland

-- 
Roland Hieber, Pengutronix e.K.          | r.hieber@pengutronix.de     |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                     | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686         | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |