On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 3:42 PM Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 21 September 2018 at 17:49, Dylan Baker <dy...@pnwbakers.com> wrote: > > Quoting Emil Velikov (2018-09-21 09:07:58) > >> On 21 September 2018 at 16:55, Dylan Baker <dy...@pnwbakers.com> wrote: > >> > Quoting Emil Velikov (2018-09-21 08:47:30) > >> >> On 21 September 2018 at 08:19, Juan A. Suarez Romero > >> >> <jasua...@igalia.com> wrote: > >> >> > On Thu, 2018-09-20 at 20:16 +0200, Bas Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 7:33 PM Eric Engestrom > >> >> >> <eric.engest...@intel.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > On Thursday, 2018-09-20 19:17:57 +0200, Bas Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > >> >> >> > > Was missing the init, found by Emil. > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > Fixes: d17443a4593 "radv: Use build ID if available for cache > >> >> >> > > UUID." > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Reviewed-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@intel.com> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > CC: <mesa-sta...@lists.freedesktop.org> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Cc'ing mesa-stable has no effect when you're already adding the > >> >> >> > proper Fixes: tag :) > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Last time I asked about the difference between Fixes and CC, the > >> >> >> conclusion I got that Fixes is only best effort for the stable > >> >> >> branches and that if it does not apply it will be dropped silently, > >> >> >> while for the CC ones the release manager will notify you. > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > In previous releases that was the way it worked: we always our best > >> >> > effort to > >> >> > apply CC and Fixes patches. The difference was that if we couldn't > >> >> > apply the > >> >> > patch, then we were only notifying in the pre-announcement "Rejected" > >> >> > section > >> >> > about the CC, and silently ignoring the Fixes. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > But nowadays, we notify about all the candidates to stable, which are > >> >> > CC and > >> >> > Fixes. > >> >> > > >> >> Here is an alternative wording, hopefully it will make things clearer: > >> >> > >> >> Both CC and Fixes work and having both does not hurt. > >> >> > >> >> Fixes provides clear indication when/where the problem originates. > >> >> Cc _explicitly_ requests the patch to be in stable - that's why we > >> >> have the list + late nominations. > >> >> > >> >> It _explicit_ nomination does _not_ apply then the nominator is > >> >> informed. > >> >> > >> >> -Emil > >> > > >> > Yeah, that's not useful. We don't need a "you can put this in if you > >> > want but > >> > don't tell me if you didn't". Either it's nominated or it's not. If > >> > Fixes: > >> > doesn't mean "I want this in any stable branch with commit X" then we > >> > should > >> > stop using the tag. > >> > > >> Fixes means "I want this _anywhere_ with commit X". No idea how you > >> read my comment otherwise ;-) > >> > >> -Emil > > > > Where you said CC is _explicit_ but fixes isn't. Having two ways to do the > > same > > thing that are subtly different seems like a bad idea to me. > > > > I'm going to admit this is just another reason that I feel like our whole > > stable > > process is rather fragile and tedious. We have three ways to nominate a > > patch > > that are all subtly different, but those differences are not clearly > > documented. > > Keep in mind that before I started the documentation was a mere > fraction of what it is today. > As I said multiple times if something is unclear - ask _and_ send > patches to clarify the documentation. > > Sadly close to no patches appear :-(
I'm happy to send patches to clarify the documentation once this discussion is through. However, I'm not sure how to reconcile your statements though: "Both CC and Fixes work and having both does not hurt. Fixes provides clear indication when/where the problem originates. Cc _explicitly_ requests the patch to be in stable - that's why we have the list + late nominations. It _explicit_ nomination does _not_ apply then the nominator is informed." which seems to say that patches with only "Fixes:" can get rejected silently. (which would match Juan's old answer in https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-stable/2018-April/008072.html) vs. "As a TL;DR _nothing_ is rejected silently ;-)" which seems to say that patches with only "Fixes:" can not get rejected silently. (which matches what Dylan is saying) While documentation can help prevent future confusion/discussion on this topic, which way should the documentation go, as these two statements seem to contradict each other to me. > > Our thinking, and hence expressions vary, so I'm more than happy to > change the docs so that they are better suited for a wider audience. > > As a TL;DR _nothing_ is rejected silently ;-) > > -Emil > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev