On 04 Jan 10:03, Finucane, Stephen wrote: > On 26 Dec 13:23, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > [snip] > > > > However, all this is me thinking out loud for now, and I'm busy enough > > > reviewing patches and trying to get something approaching series > > > support into upstream (plus, you know, my day job) to volunteer > > > implementing this. As such, if you agree with my idea but don't think > > > it worth the effort (or just flat out disagree) then I'm happy to > > > give my review comments on this with an eye to merging it shortly. If > > > you do agree though, maybe we should hold off merging this until we > > > explore these options? > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > I generally like implementing features in a generic way, but as an > > occasional > > patchwork user I have a hard time judging how useful it would be. The trust > > issue that Johannes raised should also be considered here, to make sure > > that a > > malicious user wont be able to take advantage of either the criteria or the > > action to attack the patchwork host. > > Yeah, I haven't exactly scoped it out enough yet to begin working on > it. It's probably best to add such a feature to the backlog and add it > in the future if the need arises (i.e. we get another "hook"-style > feature request). I'll work on getting this merged in the interim. > > Stephen
All merged. Thanks very much folks :) Stephen _______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
