Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests
On 16/02/2018 17:09, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> BTW, Fam and I are also planning to improve Patchew so that it is better >> at detecting pull requests and especially merged pull requests. > > Cool. > > Would a certain formatting be helpful for patchew as well? Or do you > plan to parse the cover letter to hopefully find the output of git > request-pull and get the correct base from that? Yes, basically replace "git am" with "git fetch" if the cover letter has a line that looks like it's produced by "git request-pull". Paolo
Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests
On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:08:39 +0100 Paolo Bonziniwrote: > On 16/02/2018 16:03, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On 16 February 2018 at 14:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> On 16/02/2018 12:25, Peter Maydell wrote: > >>> On 16 February 2018 at 11:18, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >>> The block folks are already doing this, so we should just > >>> formalize what they're doing at the moment I guess. From my point > >>> of view as long as there's something I can easily filter > >>> in/out in the email body or subject so I don't get confused > >>> (and which doesn't require me to update my filters every time > >>> a new subsystem switches to using submaintainer pulls!) > >>> I don't mind about the rest of it. Maybe a subject line with > >>> 'PULL SUBSYSTEM s390x' (ditto block, etc etc) ? > >> > >> What about just requiring you to be in the "To" or "Cc" fields? That > >> works pretty well for Linux. > > > > It would require existing submaintainers to change their process, > > though -- currently not all pull requests are to/cc me. > > Yeah, but that would not be too hard. There are only about 40 > maintainers, and if anybody misses the news they would notice fairly > quickly. :) Well, I wouldn't mind (I send pull requests to Peter anyway, and I'd certainly want s390x pull requests addressed to me as well). We could use both (subject prefix and To:/Cc:) for a belt-and-suspenders approach. > > BTW, Fam and I are also planning to improve Patchew so that it is better > at detecting pull requests and especially merged pull requests. Cool. Would a certain formatting be helpful for patchew as well? Or do you plan to parse the cover letter to hopefully find the output of git request-pull and get the correct base from that?
Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests
On 16 February 2018 at 15:13, Daniel P. Berrangéwrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 03:03:07PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 16 February 2018 at 14:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> > On 16/02/2018 12:25, Peter Maydell wrote: >> >> On 16 February 2018 at 11:18, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> >> The block folks are already doing this, so we should just >> >> formalize what they're doing at the moment I guess. From my point >> >> of view as long as there's something I can easily filter >> >> in/out in the email body or subject so I don't get confused >> >> (and which doesn't require me to update my filters every time >> >> a new subsystem switches to using submaintainer pulls!) >> >> I don't mind about the rest of it. Maybe a subject line with >> >> 'PULL SUBSYSTEM s390x' (ditto block, etc etc) ? >> > >> > What about just requiring you to be in the "To" or "Cc" fields? That >> > works pretty well for Linux. >> >> It would require existing submaintainers to change their process, >> though -- currently not all pull requests are to/cc me. > > All this time I thought it was /already/ required to cc Peter on > pull requests ! The only thing I currently require is that the body text contains the appropriate magic words and that it goes to qemu-devel in to or cc. thanks -- PMM
Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 03:03:07PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 16 February 2018 at 14:53, Paolo Bonziniwrote: > > On 16/02/2018 12:25, Peter Maydell wrote: > >> On 16 February 2018 at 11:18, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >> The block folks are already doing this, so we should just > >> formalize what they're doing at the moment I guess. From my point > >> of view as long as there's something I can easily filter > >> in/out in the email body or subject so I don't get confused > >> (and which doesn't require me to update my filters every time > >> a new subsystem switches to using submaintainer pulls!) > >> I don't mind about the rest of it. Maybe a subject line with > >> 'PULL SUBSYSTEM s390x' (ditto block, etc etc) ? > > > > What about just requiring you to be in the "To" or "Cc" fields? That > > works pretty well for Linux. > > It would require existing submaintainers to change their process, > though -- currently not all pull requests are to/cc me. All this time I thought it was /already/ required to cc Peter on pull requests ! Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o-https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o-https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org-o-https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests
On 16/02/2018 16:03, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 16 February 2018 at 14:53, Paolo Bonziniwrote: >> On 16/02/2018 12:25, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> On 16 February 2018 at 11:18, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>> The block folks are already doing this, so we should just >>> formalize what they're doing at the moment I guess. From my point >>> of view as long as there's something I can easily filter >>> in/out in the email body or subject so I don't get confused >>> (and which doesn't require me to update my filters every time >>> a new subsystem switches to using submaintainer pulls!) >>> I don't mind about the rest of it. Maybe a subject line with >>> 'PULL SUBSYSTEM s390x' (ditto block, etc etc) ? >> >> What about just requiring you to be in the "To" or "Cc" fields? That >> works pretty well for Linux. > > It would require existing submaintainers to change their process, > though -- currently not all pull requests are to/cc me. Yeah, but that would not be too hard. There are only about 40 maintainers, and if anybody misses the news they would notice fairly quickly. :) BTW, Fam and I are also planning to improve Patchew so that it is better at detecting pull requests and especially merged pull requests. Thanks, Paolo
Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests
On 16 February 2018 at 14:53, Paolo Bonziniwrote: > On 16/02/2018 12:25, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 16 February 2018 at 11:18, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> The block folks are already doing this, so we should just >> formalize what they're doing at the moment I guess. From my point >> of view as long as there's something I can easily filter >> in/out in the email body or subject so I don't get confused >> (and which doesn't require me to update my filters every time >> a new subsystem switches to using submaintainer pulls!) >> I don't mind about the rest of it. Maybe a subject line with >> 'PULL SUBSYSTEM s390x' (ditto block, etc etc) ? > > What about just requiring you to be in the "To" or "Cc" fields? That > works pretty well for Linux. It would require existing submaintainers to change their process, though -- currently not all pull requests are to/cc me. thanks -- PMM
Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests
On 16/02/2018 12:25, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 16 February 2018 at 11:18, Cornelia Huckwrote: > The block folks are already doing this, so we should just > formalize what they're doing at the moment I guess. From my point > of view as long as there's something I can easily filter > in/out in the email body or subject so I don't get confused > (and which doesn't require me to update my filters every time > a new subsystem switches to using submaintainer pulls!) > I don't mind about the rest of it. Maybe a subject line with > 'PULL SUBSYSTEM s390x' (ditto block, etc etc) ? What about just requiring you to be in the "To" or "Cc" fields? That works pretty well for Linux. Paolo
Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests
On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:25:12 + Peter Maydellwrote: > On 16 February 2018 at 11:18, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > Hi, > > > > for 2.13 (or whatever it will be called), I'd like to switch to a > > submaintainer model for s390x, where maintainers for a certain s390x > > area (including myself) send me pull requests that I integrate into > > s390-next resp. s390-fixes, for which I send a pull request to merge > > into master. > > > > The problem here is that I don't want these sub pull requests to be > > picked up by Peter's scripts, generating confusion. So far, my ideas > > have been: > > > > - Post s390 pull requests only to qemu-s3...@nongnu.org. This sucks, as > > it makes part of the process intransparent to any QEMU developer not > > subscribed to that mailing list. > > - Put a certain marker into the subject, like "PULL *s390x*" or so. I'm > > not sure how robust that is. > > - Ditch the pull request idea, keep applying patches. This is not quite > > as bad as it sounds, as I have the infrastructure to apply patches > > anyway, but it hides the real workflow (and simply pulling is likely > > less work for me in the long run.) > > The block folks are already doing this, so we should just > formalize what they're doing at the moment I guess. From my point > of view as long as there's something I can easily filter > in/out in the email body or subject so I don't get confused > (and which doesn't require me to update my filters every time > a new subsystem switches to using submaintainer pulls!) > I don't mind about the rest of it. Maybe a subject line with > 'PULL SUBSYSTEM s390x' (ditto block, etc etc) ? Yes, "PULL SUBSYSTEM " looks reasonable.
Re: [Qemu-devel] [Process] QEMU submaintainers and pull requests
On 16 February 2018 at 11:18, Cornelia Huckwrote: > Hi, > > for 2.13 (or whatever it will be called), I'd like to switch to a > submaintainer model for s390x, where maintainers for a certain s390x > area (including myself) send me pull requests that I integrate into > s390-next resp. s390-fixes, for which I send a pull request to merge > into master. > > The problem here is that I don't want these sub pull requests to be > picked up by Peter's scripts, generating confusion. So far, my ideas > have been: > > - Post s390 pull requests only to qemu-s3...@nongnu.org. This sucks, as > it makes part of the process intransparent to any QEMU developer not > subscribed to that mailing list. > - Put a certain marker into the subject, like "PULL *s390x*" or so. I'm > not sure how robust that is. > - Ditch the pull request idea, keep applying patches. This is not quite > as bad as it sounds, as I have the infrastructure to apply patches > anyway, but it hides the real workflow (and simply pulling is likely > less work for me in the long run.) The block folks are already doing this, so we should just formalize what they're doing at the moment I guess. From my point of view as long as there's something I can easily filter in/out in the email body or subject so I don't get confused (and which doesn't require me to update my filters every time a new subsystem switches to using submaintainer pulls!) I don't mind about the rest of it. Maybe a subject line with 'PULL SUBSYSTEM s390x' (ditto block, etc etc) ? thanks -- PMM