On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 07:49:40AM +0100, Heiko Schocher wrote: > Hello Bin, > > Am 28.01.2016 um 02:49 schrieb Bin Meng: > >On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > >>On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 06:05:01PM -0600, Joe Hershberger wrote: > >>>On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > >>>>On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 05:15:17PM -0600, Joe Hershberger wrote: > >>>>>On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > >>>>>>On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 03:08:09PM -0600, Joe Hershberger wrote: > >>>>>>>Hi Tom, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>I'm playing with the idea of including the patchwork patch ID in the > >>>>>>>commit message of each commit that I apply to provide better > >>>>>>>cross-reference ability. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>* Access to comments on patches > >>>>>>>* Clarity on exactly which version of a patch was applied > >>>>>>>* No need to search by patch subject > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Here is an example in a working branch: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-net.git;a=commit;h=48f9a0c786d0a3cbfdf45846567deaebe27a334a > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I'd prfer Patchwork or Patchwork-ID or something not just Patch. > >>>>> > >>>>>Would it be more or less compelling if it had a format similar this? > >>>>> > >>>>>Patchwork: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/571773/ > >>>> > >>>>Yes. > >>> > >>>Are you being funny (more and less == not)? Or did you miss-read? :) > >> > >>Oops, yes, misread, yes, I like that. > >> > >>>>>>>What do you (or anyone else) think? > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Well, I'm not a super fan of it. For your second point, this is why I > >>>>>>use bundles, mutt and a macro. For the other points, at least I find > >>>>>>google does a good job pulling up the right patch at least. > >>>>> > >>>>>Bundles seem awkward. Perhaps I'm just not using them effectively. > >>>>>What benefit do they give you? How are they part of your workflow? > >>>> > >>>>OK, I'm going to delete this in a few days but here's my bundle for the > >>> > >>>Doesn't that mean it will very soon not be traceable exactly which > >>>patch version was applied? What I was proposing would mean that the > >>>commit message could continue to refer back to the patch even if > >>>archived. > >> > >>It means the the link I gave for the bundle will be gone. The patches > >>will be there, but I will also move them from Under Review to Accepted. > >> > >>>>last import I did: > >>>>https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/bundle/trini/2016-01-25-master-imports/ > >>>>My flow is: > >>>>1) Assign all unassigned patches > >>>>2) Open my todo list in patchwork > >>>>3) Create a bundle with all of the patches I want based on my critera at > >>>>the time. > >>>>4) Download bundle as mbox, git am -3 it, get big build going. > >>>>5) Open each patch link, check for Nak/Changed/Uncertanty that I missed > >>>>at first > >>>>6) Assuming no repeats of part 4 of the cycle, mutt -f the bundle, for > >>>>each email group reply, run macro to insert applied message, postponed > >>>>7) Check output from big build, assuming good results, push and spam out > >>>>all of my queued messages. > >>> > >>>Gotcha. Thanks! > >>> > >>>I'm trying to improve my workflow now, and this Patch tag was > >>>something that came out of it. It's not required for the workflow, but > >>>it is free to do within it. It has the potential to slightly simplify > >>>one possible workflow, so no big deal. > >>> > >>>If people think it will be simply noise, I'll leave it out. > >>> > >>>I think this may speed up cross-referencing. Seemed like a good thing. > >> > >>My concern is that since it's not injected by patchwork already I would > >>have to add it to each commit. Today, unless I need to either make > >>something apply or do a minor fixup to the contents, I don't modify any > >>commit message, so my git am is it. > > > >Does it make sense to enhance patchwork to inject such link into the > >commit automatically? It can also be a project configuration option so > >that other projects tracked by patchwork can turn it on on their > >needs. > > +1
Well, code it up and send the patchwork list a patch and see how it goes :) -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot