[oe] patch queue/patchwork: How should states be used? (was: update canutils to current version)

[Paul Menzel]

Am Freitag, den 13.08.2010, 23:01 +0200 schrieb Vitus Jensen:
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Khem Raj wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Vitus Jensen <vjensen at gmx.de> wrote:

[…]

> >> They did.  But after you posted you ACKs I changed their state to "Accepted"
> >> and then they are usually filtered by "Action Required".  I'm not really
> >> sure I did the right thing but I don't believe they shouldn't remain in
> >> "New".
> >
> > If they got applied change the state to 'applied'
> 
> Sure, already did!  Do I set the 'archive' bit, too?

I think so. Yes.

> Frans got hit by the fact, that 'accepted' patches don't show up in the 
> list by default.
> 
> Vitus posts patches
> Frans acks patches
> Vitus changes state to 'accepted'
> Vitus asks Frans to apply
> Frans: where are those patches in patchwork???
> Frans forces his googlemail to produce usable mail and applies
> Vitus changes state to 'applied'

I would also advise to set the commit ID when setting the state to
applied. Actually this can be done automatically [2], but the
administrators have not yet had time to address this.

We have the following 11 states.

        $ pwclient state
        ID    Name
        --    ----
        1     New
        2     Under Review
        3     Accepted
        4     Rejected
        5     RFC
        6     Not Applicable
        7     Changes Requested
        8     Awaiting Upstream
        9     Superseded
        10    Deferred
        11    Applied

What is the difference between 3 (Accepted) and 8 (Awaiting Upstream)?

> Probably I should update the wiki [1] to document the above procedure, right?

That would be great. But before there should be reached a little
consensus to save you some unnecessary work.

I guess the accepted state is too much work and could be skipped?

+ Normally people reviewing and acknowledging patches have commit access
and will do this shortly afterward.
- People with commit access not searching the list and just looking at
the patch queue would see that those patches have been reviewed and
acknowledged and could commit these patches.

I do not know if we already have some people taking care of the patch
queue. If there are such folks, they should voice their opinion what
they prefer.


Thanks,

Paul


[1] http://wiki.openembedded.net/index.php/Patchwork
[2] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2010-August/022588.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/attachments/20100813/d0e9a807/attachment-0002.sig>