This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Automating the maintenance of the ChangeLog file
On 29/11/18 9:21 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:03 AM Siddhesh Poyarekar <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
If we cannot make patchwork happy, we can rest assured that we cannot
make any PR based tools happy.
Is that right, though? In a PR-based workflow, the primary artifact
is a VCS branch and its meta-revision history (i.e. first we had this
series of commits, then they got rebased and now we have this other
one, etc) and the review discussion (which may still be email-based,
and indeed I hope it will be) is hanging off of that. It seems to me
that that would inherently make it easier for a patch tracker to
monitor the status of all proposed changes, since it can directly
monitor events in the VCS rather than trying to reconstruct them from
emails that may be ambiguous.
I should clarify that I'm not promoting patchwork as the end result of
our efforts. The only point I'm making is that we don't necessarily
need to choose a PR-based workflow now to make our patches compatible
with them; patchwork can do that for us.
Choice of patch review tools is going to take another Cauldron at least,
if not two. Patchwork exists today because one day I hosted it on my
personal host some years ago and a bunch of us liked it at the time.
The result was that not a lot of people (including me) used it and it
bit rotted. We need to make sure that that doesn't happen again.