Stephen Finucane <step...@that.guru> writes: > On Thu, 2017-06-22 at 13:03 -0700, Sean Farley wrote: >> Stephen Finucane <step...@that.guru> writes: >> >> > One of my Red Hat colleagues showed me a tool this morning - patches [1] - >> > that >> > the QEMU community use. They seem to be building a huge JSON blob of >> > seriesified patches as part of a cron job [2], and that tool can >> > download/parse >> > this blob and apply locally stored patches. >> > >> > I noted that in that blob, _everything_ is considered to be part of a >> > series. >> > I've seen this design before in the freedesktop instance [3] and wasn't too >> > pushed on it at the time as it seemed like a bit of a lie (those patches >> > aren't >> > actually in a series). However, the ability to see *all* patches in series- >> > patch manner, rather than the inverted patch-series manner, is actually >> > rather >> > nifty. If would also mean testing of patches could happen without needing >> > to >> > filter for both 'patch-created' (for non-series patches) and 'series- >> > completed' >> > events (for series patches). >> > >> > What do folks think? Any reason not to create a series for _all_ patches? >> >> I kinda assumed this was already done. Just to clarify, as of right now, >> patchwork doesn't not put a single patch into a series? > > The key differentiator is whether the subject has series markers (i.e. [N/M]). > This means that if the patch has a cover letter (and therefore has a [1/1] > marker) then it would go into a series. Without this, however, the 'series' > attribute is unset.
Our (Mercurial) mailing list actually bans summary emails; so none of our series have that cover letter. >> I like to think of all series (even those of one patch) as a branch. So, >> a bit like saying a branch can only have >1 commit and those of one >> commit are not on a branch. Weird to me. > > That's not a bad analogy. I was thinking of them more as auto-generated > bundles, and there wasn't a need to "bundle" a single patch. A branch might be > a better approach. > > Overall so, I'm guessing you're in favour of this? Yep :-)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork