On 15 November 2013 21:08, Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 03:43:03PM -0800, Vadim Bendebury (????) wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote: >> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:59:05PM -0800, Vadim Bendebury (????) wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote: >> >> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:46:35AM -0800, Vadim Bendebury (????) wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Hello Wolfgang, >> >> > [snip] >> >> >> > Can you not pick up the patches directly from the mailing list? I >> >> >> > mean, we know of the problems patchwork has (like silently dropping >> >> >> > certain base64 / utf8 encoded messages), so we should rather try and >> >> >> > get a more reliable feed for the patches? >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> this is the thing: picking up patches from patchwork is not something >> >> >> you'd do regularly - this is just my way of populating the review site >> >> >> from a single test account. >> >> >> >> >> >> If this workflow were adopted, each user would push their patch to the >> >> >> gerrit server, creating a new review branch for that particular patch. >> >> >> In general, gerrit view of the branch matches the submitter's view of >> >> >> the branch - if the submitter has several patches in one branch, they >> >> >> will all be uploaded by gerrit to the same separate branch, >> >> >> maintaining the relationship between the patches. >> >> > >> >> > This is my biggest concern. On the one-off to infrequent contribution >> >> > side (and we do have some of that), I worry about the infrastucture >> >> > hurdle here. >> >> > >> >> >> >> Sorry, I am not sure i understand what the biggest concern is: that >> >> the users would push their own patches? Why is this a problem - the >> >> patches would go into their own branches until reviewed and merged. Or >> >> did you mean something else? >> > >> > I mean, it's a higher hurdle to clear. Looking at other non-Android >> > projects, I know some folks have said "bah, not worth the effort" to >> > push trivial things, if it must come via gerrit. So some way to scrape >> > the ML for things that don't come in via gerrit to start with would be >> > handy. >> >> I guess if the submitters are still expected to do both, ML and >> gerrit, then yes, but the idea is that gerrit is the way to go, >> mailing list is whatever gerrit generates. This way sending an email >> to the mailing list or running 'git push' require pretty much similar >> efforts > > No, what I mean is, for the casual developer, having to setup a few > things just to post a patch might be too high a hurdle to bother with. > I suspect as Otavio suggested, people that post patches and don't have a > gerrit account (in other words, the occasional or lone bugfix > contributor), we'll just have to pick up, integrate it by hand, into > gerrit.
You need patch(1) to generate a patch and subscribe to mailing list to post it. To upload to gerrit you need git and subscribe to gerrit. Two things one way or the other. Michal _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
