On 6/2/2020 1:27 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 3:38 PM Gaëtan Rivet <gr...@u256.net> wrote: >> >> On 27/05/20 09:28 +0000, Jerin Kollanukkaran wrote: >>> I think, original discussion[1] on this topic got lost in GitHub vs current >>> workflow. >>> >>> >>> I would like to propose GitHub "CODEOWNERS"[2] _LIKE_ scheme for DPDK >>> workflow. >>> >>> Current scheme: >>> - When we submit a patch to ml, someone(Tree maintainer[3]) needs to >>> manually >>> delegate the patch to Tree maintainer in patchwork. >>> - Tree maintainer is not responsible for the review of the patch but only >>> responsible >>> for merging _after_ the review. That brings the obvious question on review >>> responsibility. >>> >>> >>> Proposed scheme: >>> - In order to improve review ownership, IMO, it is better the CI tools >>> delegate >>> the patch to the actual maintainer(who is responsible for specific code in >>> MAINTAINERS file) >>> - I believe, it provides a sense of ownership, avoids last-minute surprise >>> on >>> review responsibility and improve review traceability. >>> >>> Implementation of the proposed scheme: >>> GitHub provides a bot for CODEOWNERS integration, Similar alternative is >>> possible with >>> patchwork with "auto delegation scheme" using the flowing methods: >>> >>> a) https://patchwork.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage/delegation/ >>> b) https://patchwork.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage/headers/ >>> >>> I think, option (a) would be relatively easy to change without introducing >>> the new tools. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> [1] >>> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-May/168740.html >>> [2] >>> https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/blob/master/CODEOWNERS >>> [3] >>> https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/ >>> >> >> Hi, >> >> +1 from me. People would be able to list current assigned tasks through >> pwclient. It would help reviews IMO. > > So far no objection to this proposal. Any other thoughts from anyone? > especially from the code maintainers. > > Thomas, Any input as patchwork maintainer. This would boil down to the > following change in patchwork. > > 1) Add code maintainers are maintainers in patchwork. > 2) Enable existing auto delegation[1] feature of Patchwork > [1] > a) https://patchwork.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage/delegation/ > b) https://patchwork.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage/headers/ > > The suggested process is: > # When a patch gets submitted to ml, patchwork finds the code owner > based on the MAINTAINER file using the auto delegation feature. > # The code maintainer will be responsible for the "review" of that > patch and patch will be delegate will code owner using auto delegation > feature. > # If multiple code maintainers operate on the same patch, "each code > maintainer" can assign to "other code maintainer" once he is done with > the review. > # The existing review process will be followed as is, just that we are > adding code maintainer have primary review responsibility for the > patch and expressing in the patchwork. > # Based on the Ack's received and/or when code owner is happy with > changes, he/she can change the state to "Awaiting upstream" and > assign to respective > tree maintainer. > # Finally, Tree maintainer will merge the patch to respective tree and > make the state as "Accepted" >
+1 from me, this can help maintainers to figure out patches waiting for their review. Did you have a chance to test auto delegation, will it work for us?
