Hi Stephen, On 6/2/20 11:14 AM, Stephen Finucane wrote: > Our documentation [1] suggests people initialize their development > environments by download the archives of the Patchwork mailing lists > from [2] and load them with the 'parsearchive' command. However, it's > been pointed out to me that at request to [1] now return only a handful > of recent messages. Is this change intentional?
we intensively used parsearchive over the last few weeks to simulate incoming patches to patchwork. (We're working on the PaStA integration) However, we experienced similar behavior with parsearchive and realised that the order of messages in the mbox-file does matter: We get different stats if we reverse the mbox, while order of incoming messages shouldn't matter at all - you never know which mail you receive first. Besides that, we also realised that 'failed' messages somehow get marked by patchwork. Consider the following scenario: You want to parse a mbox for mailing list a...@b.com, but you didn't configure the corresponding project yet. parsearchive will report that it didn't find a single patch. That's true, because it's simply missing the configuration. Then you create and configure the project, and re-run parsearchive. Again, parsearchive will report that it couldn't find a single patch. I assume that during the first run, message-ids that contain non-valid mails somehow get stored. In order to import that archive, we had to wipe the whole database. I thought this behavior would be intentional, but I think it's worth mentioning our findings as you seem to have related issues. > > Stephen > > [1] > https://patchwork.readthedocs.io/en/latest/development/installation/#import-mailing-list-archives > [2] https://lists.ozlabs.org/private/patchwork.mbox/patchwork.mbox Didn't test this archive, though. Downloading it requires authentication. Ralf _______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
