Updated Sourceware infrastructure plans

[Mark Wielaard]

Hi Jonathan,

On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 08:38:26PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 2024 at 20:19, Jeff Law via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> > We're currently using patchwork to track patches tagged with RISC-V.  We
> > don't do much review with patchwork.  In that model patchwork ultimately
> > just adds overhead as I'm constantly trying to figure out what patches
> > have been integrated vs what are still outstanding.
> 
> If patches sent by email exactly match what's committed, then the
> update_gcc_pw.sh script that I run will correctly update patchwork to
> say they're committed. I tend to only bother running that once a week,
> because it misses so many and so is of limited use. If we are now
> supposed to send generated files in the patches, and we discourage
> people from committing something close-but-not-identical to what they
> sent by email, then the script will do a better job of updating
> patchwork, and then we should look at running it automatically (not
> just when I think to run it manually).

See also https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30997
We really should automate this. There are several people running
scripts by hand. The easiest would be to simply run it from a git
hook.  patchwork comes with a simple script that just calculates the
hash and pings patchwork, which can then mark the patch associated
with that hash as committed. If people really believe calculating a
hash is too much work from a git hook then we can also simply run it
from builder.sourceware.org. We already run a builder for each commit
anyway. It would just be one extra build step checking the commit
against patchwork.

Cheers,

Mark