On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 10:41:48AM +0200, Holger Freyther wrote: > Hi, > > we have the first round of contributions through Gerrit and maybe now is a > good time to look at the mail setup. My goal was to: > > * Have diff's/patches be sent to the MailingList to see what is going on > * Have comments be sent to the MailingList to have people learn from feedback > > In terms of technology Gerrit offers us the following notifications[1] > > new_changes Somebody created a new change > new_patchsets Somebody updated/added a patch(set) to a change > all_comments Somebody but jenkins commented > submitted_changes Somebody has pushed the submit button and it is in > abandoned_changes Somebody gave up on the change > all Everything > > > Currently we are using "all" and maybe we want to limit it to "new_patchsets" > and "all_comments". "all_comments" is a bit troublesome as it includes empty > messages like "+2" with actual review comments.
I like to see everything on a mailing list so that I get updated as I read
mails in my mail client, without having to navigate to some other place and
klick 100 times.
I was thinking though about local filtering to direct the pretty high volume
and for my taste too verbose (s.b.) messages in a separate mail folder. Maybe
having a separate mailing list would make sense there for easier filtering.
Also the 'no-reply' sender is cumbersome, it should be sent by or have
a Reply-To: header so that replies go back to the mailing list instead of
individual recipients. (whether openbsc@ or a new gerrit ML, don't know)
Details on my "too verbose" opinion: I'd prefer to have none of the automatic
palaver words in the mails, and the subject should show the nature of the
notification, with only project name and log summary.
Ideally I want to see events of a given patch in a single mail thread on the
first glance:
[PATCH] openbsc: frobnicate fringlebroods
├─> [+0] openbsc: frobnicate fringlebroods
├─> [-1] openbsc: frobnicate fringlebroods
├─> [PATCH] openbsc: frobnicate fringlebroods (#2)
├─> [+2] openbsc: frobnicate fringlebroods (#2)
└─> [MERGED] openbsc: frobnicate fringlebroods (#2)
and the meat of the events in the mail body, without cruft.
(Not sure how much of it is easily available... just brainstorming)
For example:
(1)
Instead of
Subject: Change in osmo-pcu[master]: Restructure sources
Body:
From Max <msur...@sysmocom.de>:
Max has uploaded a new change for review.
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/58
Change subject: Restructure sources
I would prefer
Subject: [PATCH] osmo-pcu: Restructure sources
Body:
New patch: https://gerrit.osmocom.org/58
By: msuraev
<log msg + diff>
(2)
Instead of
Subject: Change in osmo-iuh[master]: attempt to fix parallel build, improve
AM logic
Body:
From ahuemer <alexander.hue...@xx.vu>:
Hello Jenkins Builder, Holger Freyther,
I'd like you to reexamine a change. Please visit
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/65 to look at the new patch set (#2).
I would prefer
Subject: [+0] osmo-iuh: attempt to fix parallel build, improve AM logic
Body:
New comment: https://gerrit.osmocom.org/65
By: ahuemer
<actual comment>
(3)
Instead of
Subject: Change in openbsc[master]: db.c: implemented incremental migration
Body: Holger Freyther has submitted this change and it was merged.[...]
I would prefer
Subject: [MERGED] openbsc: db.c: implemented incremental migration
Body:
Merged: https://gerrit.osmocom.org/99
</end-of-mail>
(all other info is available in previous mails)
The question though is, if the mail subjects vary depending on new
patch/comment/merged/..., will mail clients still show them in the same thread?
Maybe the already present In-Reply-To: header is sufficient there?
~Neels
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
