On 9 August 2017 at 12:51, Aaron Conole <[email protected]> wrote: > Darrell Ball <[email protected]> writes: > >> Thanks Joe >> I forgot to add your Tested-by to V5; I have been testing this myself; >> but let me know if you would like it added – I can send a V6. > > It will automatically be added by patchwork. It is sufficient to > download (ex: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/799499/mbox) > > I usually use patchwork when working on a series - if I download it from > patchwork, I can be confident that all the tags are applied properly, so > I won't forget. Plus, all the discussion happens there, so I can > quickly browse it.
Indeed. Personally I tend to use 'pwclient' for this, although occasionally pwclient gets a little confused by some patches. Using the links like you have provided above is always reliable. https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/help/pwclient/ https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/pwclientrc/ (direct download of .pwclientrc) > The full list is available at: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/list/ > > It would actually be cool to have a few more admins to troll patchwork > and do things like ping for status (ex: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/719492/ is this still needed? it > does seem to mostly apply). Then we could make sure we don't miss > things. I know that there are a few of us who already do this, perhaps for some of these months-old patches we should just respond on the list thread to ask if the submitter is still looking for review and try to link them up with a reviewer. In the particular linked case, typically when the submitter is a maintainer and their patch is acked, the submitter/maintainer would apply it. It looks like it fell through Daniele's radar though. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
