On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 13:58 +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote: > Hi Guilherme, > > > all different projects that Linaro engineers may contribute to (we don't > > have a list of all these projects beforehand and we expect it to grow > > all the time). > > You'll still have the same problem here; patchwork needs to know about the > project before it will parse patches for that project.
You're right, but we have a custom email-parsing script which places patches sent to unknown mailing lists under a catch-all project. That allows us to identify new projects that need to be created, and together with a new form for moving multiple patches from one project to another we can also easily move the patches from the catch-all project to the newly created ones. I haven't sent the patches for those changes because I thought they wouldn't be of much use in general, but I'm happy to send them if you think they could be useful to others. > > My only concern is the impresicion of using the list address; it'd be common > to send a patch to mulitple lists. If patchwork is configured for both lists, > we'll end up with a dropped patch on the non-matched list. > > We could work-around this with handling multiple 'parses' per incoming email, > but we'd need to be careful about avoiding duplicates here. We could also make find_project() return a list of projects and create one Patch for every project returned. > > Also, if this was configurable (PATCHWORK_FALLBACK_TO_LISTEMAIL perhaps?), > I'd > be much happier :) Sure, I'm happy to make it configurable. Cheers, -- Guilherme Salgado <https://launchpad.net/~salgado>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
