Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnel...@au1.ibm.com> writes: > On 30/05/17 08:50, Stephen Finucane wrote: >> On Sat, 2017-05-27 at 20:17 +0200, Philippe Pepiot wrote: >>> By adding a `subject_prefix` settings to Project. Mail will be >>> assigned >>> to project if List-Id match and prefix is present. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Pepiot <p...@philpep.org> >> >> Hmm, so I'm not entirely sure about this. On one hand, I understand why >> it would be helpful to do this. However, commit '66a88a46' was supposed >> to address this. Is there something that that change doesn't have that >> you need to expose? I've CCd the authors/reviewers of that change to >> get their input. >> >> fwiw, in the longer term I'd like to add a label feature that would >> track most of the labels found in subjects (i.e. everything except >> 'PATCH', 'RFC', 'nn/mm' and 'vNN' tags). This is decidedly a 2.1+ goal, >> however. > > 66a88a46 was designed purely to solve the issue of figuring out which > repository to apply a patch to for CI purposes, nothing more. > > I can see why a maintainer may want to go all the way and consider it to > be a full separate patchwork project, but I don't think the maintainers > of any of the lists I'm on that use subject prefixes would want to do this. > > You're also going to have to deal with the inevitable patch that misses > the correct prefix (a particular trap for new contributors). > > I'm not opposed to adding this if there are maintainers who have reasons > why they would like to have completely separate projects, though from a > CI perspective I think we're adequately served already.
The Mercurial project currently uses this prefix-as-a-different-project template. It'd be a nice to have, for sure (setting up different perms and rules, for example), but maybe just having different labels is enough. I'd be +0 on it.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
