[notmuch] patchwork test instance

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Carl Worth  [2010.02.24.2008 +0100]:
> I agree that in its current form it's not useful, (it seems to be just a
> long list of the patches that have ever been submitted).
> 
> I seem to recall Martin saying that patches that get accepted will be
> automatically detected and removed from the list. Is that successfully
> happening now?

Yes, I've automatically tagged approx. 140 patches "accepted" so
far.

> In the meantime, if someone does want to push some buttons in
> patchwork, nothing before 2009-12-01 at least is interesting.

Okay, all of those can be tagged superseeded.

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/

kermit: why are there so many songs about rainbows?
fozzy: that's part of what rainbows do.

spamtraps: madduck.bogus at madduck.net
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
URL: 

[notmuch] patchwork test instance

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Carl Worth  [2010.02.24.2010 +0100]:
> > Carl, would you consider bouncing messages to addresses like
> > patchwork+rejected at patchwork.notmuchmail.org? That would make it
> > trivial for me to write glue to update patchwork automatically.
> 
> Now you're talking my language, Martin!
> 
> I'm disinclined to go to a web browser, find the right buttons and
> push them, but it's easy for me to add an extra address when
> declining a patch, (since I have to write that email message
> already and I can even just add a keybinding to add the extra
> address).

This is trivial to implement, but I don't see myself able to do that
anytime soon. The basic idea is the same as the Git hook[0], and if
someone wanted to take a shot, I'd be happy to create an account on
the machine hosting the patchwork instance.

0. http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/patchwork/2010-February/000224.html

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/

"most people become bankrupt through having invested too heavily in
 the prose of life. to have ruined one's self over poetry is an
 honour."
-- oscar wilde

spamtraps: madduck.bogus at madduck.net
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
URL: 

[notmuch] patchwork test instance

[Carl Worth]

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:22:16 +1300, martin f krafft  
wrote:
> Carl, would you consider bouncing messages to addresses like
> patchwork+rejected at patchwork.notmuchmail.org? That would make it
> trivial for me to write glue to update patchwork automatically.

Now you're talking my language, Martin!

I'm disinclined to go to a web browser, find the right buttons and push
them, but it's easy for me to add an extra address when declining a
patch, (since I have to write that email message already and I can even
just add a keybinding to add the extra address).

-Carl

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

[notmuch] patchwork test instance

[Carl Worth]

On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:25:49 +0100, "Sebastian Spaeth"  wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:25:03 +1300, martin f krafft  
> wrote:
> > > http://patchwork.madduck.net/project/notmuch/list/ now exists.

And even as http://patchwork.notmuchmail.org now.

> As long as patches aren't being marked as "rejected" or "superseded", I
> don't think it will be that useful in the long run. If it were actually
> maintained by a few people, this would probably be different.

I agree that in its current form it's not useful, (it seems to be just a
long list of the patches that have ever been submitted).

I seem to recall Martin saying that patches that get accepted will be
automatically detected and removed from the list. Is that successfully
happening now?

> The alternative I can see is that we create a web page of patches based
> on carls notmuch tags (the tagging scheme he uses is unknown to me
> though).

At this point, and with the JSON support in place, I think it should be
trivial for someone to write a script that will take a notmuch search
specification and create an HTML view of all the threads matching that
search, right? If so, I'd be happy to regularly post the results of my
notmuch todo list, which, by the way, is currently:

notmuch search tag:todo-notmuch or (tag:notmuch and (tag:todo or tag:inbox))

In the meantime, if someone does want to push some buttons in patchwork,
nothing before 2009-12-01 at least is interesting.

-Carl
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Re: [notmuch] patchwork test instance

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org [2010.02.24.2010 +0100]:
  Carl, would you consider bouncing messages to addresses like
  patchwork+rejec...@patchwork.notmuchmail.org? That would make it
  trivial for me to write glue to update patchwork automatically.
 
 Now you're talking my language, Martin!
 
 I'm disinclined to go to a web browser, find the right buttons and
 push them, but it's easy for me to add an extra address when
 declining a patch, (since I have to write that email message
 already and I can even just add a keybinding to add the extra
 address).

This is trivial to implement, but I don't see myself able to do that
anytime soon. The basic idea is the same as the Git hook[0], and if
someone wanted to take a shot, I'd be happy to create an account on
the machine hosting the patchwork instance.

0. http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/patchwork/2010-February/000224.html

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
 
most people become bankrupt through having invested too heavily in
 the prose of life. to have ruined one's self over poetry is an
 honour.
-- oscar wilde
 
spamtraps: madduck.bo...@madduck.net


digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

[notmuch] patchwork test instance

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Sebastian Spaeth  [2010.02.10.2225 +1300]:
> "notmuch dump tag:notmuch and tag:patch" could be used to construct a
> list of "accepted", "willnottakeit","superseded" and "pending" lists or
> whatever. If that list were made accessible somewhere, this would be
> super useful. At least it would help me see whether Carl just hasn't
> gotten around to including my "press 'd' for delete" patch or whether he
> is not interested in merging it. :)

Carl, would you consider bouncing messages to addresses like
patchwork+rejected at patchwork.notmuchmail.org? That would make it
trivial for me to write glue to update patchwork automatically.

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/

"es ist gut, eine sache doppelt auszudr?cken und ihr einen
 rechten und linken fu? zu geben. auf einem bein kann die wahrheit
 zwar stehen; mit zweien aber wird sie gehen und herumkommen."
-- friedrich nietzsche

spamtraps: madduck.bogus at madduck.net

[notmuch] patchwork test instance

[martin f krafft]

also sprach David Bremner  [2010.02.10.2149 +1300]:
> I'm not sure what merging patches means here; some kind of squash
> operation?  Anyway it seemed to me that every every patch series
> that I looked at was broken into individual patches. Maybe I am
> just unlucky, or does patchwork really not understand the concept
> of series of patches in a thread?

I don't think it does, this is what bundles are for, but these need
to be created manually at the moment. Patch series are pretty easy
to detect, so maybe the bundle could be automatically generated.

http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/patchwork/2010-February/000226.html

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/

because light travels faster than sound,
some people appear to be intelligent,
until you hear them speak.

spamtraps: madduck.bogus at madduck.net

[notmuch] patchwork test instance

[martin f krafft]

also sprach martin f krafft  [2010.02.02.1131 +1300]:
> I investigated some patch/issue trackers over the weekend. Here's my
> summary/reply.
> 
> The executive summary is that
> http://patchwork.madduck.net/project/notmuch/list/ now exists.
> I have not really used it for anything real, so if some of you feel
> inclined to give it a shot, sign up and triage away! Feedback
> welcome.

Are people actually using it? I know that merging patches is
impossible, and that sucks, but otherwise: is this something to keep
around, or should I take the site offline again?

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/

"time flies like an arrow. fruit flies like a banana."
   -- groucho marx

spamtraps: madduck.bogus at madduck.net
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
URL: 

[notmuch] patchwork test instance

[Sebastian Spaeth]

On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:25:03 +1300, martin f krafft  
wrote:
> > http://patchwork.madduck.net/project/notmuch/list/ now exists.
> 
> Are people actually using it? I know that merging patches is
> impossible, and that sucks, but otherwise: is this something to keep
> around, or should I take the site offline again?

As long as patches aren't being marked as "rejected" or "superseded", I
don't think it will be that useful in the long run. If it were actually
maintained by a few people, this would probably be different.

The alternative I can see is that we create a web page of patches based
on carls notmuch tags (the tagging scheme he uses is unknown to me
though).

Something like:

"notmuch dump tag:notmuch and tag:patch" could be used to construct a
list of "accepted", "willnottakeit","superseded" and "pending" lists or
whatever. If that list were made accessible somewhere, this would be
super useful. At least it would help me see whether Carl just hasn't
gotten around to including my "press 'd' for delete" patch or whether he
is not interested in merging it. :)

Sebastian

[notmuch] patchwork test instance

[David Bremner]

On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:25:03 +1300, martin f krafft  
wrote:
> 
> Are people actually using it? I know that merging patches is
> impossible, and that sucks, but otherwise: is this something to keep
> around, or should I take the site offline again?

I'm not sure what merging patches means here; some kind of squash
operation?  Anyway it seemed to me that every every patch series that I
looked at was broken into individual patches. Maybe I am just unlucky,
or does patchwork really not understand the concept of series of patches
in a thread?

d

Re: [notmuch] patchwork test instance

[David Bremner]

On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:25:03 +1300, martin f krafft madd...@madduck.net wrote:
 
 Are people actually using it? I know that merging patches is
 impossible, and that sucks, but otherwise: is this something to keep
 around, or should I take the site offline again?

I'm not sure what merging patches means here; some kind of squash
operation?  Anyway it seemed to me that every every patch series that I
looked at was broken into individual patches. Maybe I am just unlucky,
or does patchwork really not understand the concept of series of patches
in a thread?

d


___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: [notmuch] patchwork test instance

[Sebastian Spaeth]

On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:25:03 +1300, martin f krafft madd...@madduck.net wrote:
  http://patchwork.madduck.net/project/notmuch/list/ now exists.
 
 Are people actually using it? I know that merging patches is
 impossible, and that sucks, but otherwise: is this something to keep
 around, or should I take the site offline again?

As long as patches aren't being marked as rejected or superseded, I
don't think it will be that useful in the long run. If it were actually
maintained by a few people, this would probably be different.

The alternative I can see is that we create a web page of patches based
on carls notmuch tags (the tagging scheme he uses is unknown to me
though).

Something like:

notmuch dump tag:notmuch and tag:patch could be used to construct a
list of accepted, willnottakeit,superseded and pending lists or
whatever. If that list were made accessible somewhere, this would be
super useful. At least it would help me see whether Carl just hasn't
gotten around to including my press 'd' for delete patch or whether he
is not interested in merging it. :)

Sebastian
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: [notmuch] patchwork test instance

[martin f krafft]

also sprach David Bremner brem...@unb.ca [2010.02.10.2149 +1300]:
 I'm not sure what merging patches means here; some kind of squash
 operation?  Anyway it seemed to me that every every patch series
 that I looked at was broken into individual patches. Maybe I am
 just unlucky, or does patchwork really not understand the concept
 of series of patches in a thread?

I don't think it does, this is what bundles are for, but these need
to be created manually at the moment. Patch series are pretty easy
to detect, so maybe the bundle could be automatically generated.

http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/patchwork/2010-February/000226.html

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
 
because light travels faster than sound,
some people appear to be intelligent,
until you hear them speak.
 
spamtraps: madduck.bo...@madduck.net
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: [notmuch] patchwork test instance

[martin f krafft]

also sprach martin f krafft madd...@madduck.net [2010.02.02.1131 +1300]:
 I investigated some patch/issue trackers over the weekend. Here's my
 summary/reply.
 
 The executive summary is that
 http://patchwork.madduck.net/project/notmuch/list/ now exists.
 I have not really used it for anything real, so if some of you feel
 inclined to give it a shot, sign up and triage away! Feedback
 welcome.

Are people actually using it? I know that merging patches is
impossible, and that sucks, but otherwise: is this something to keep
around, or should I take the site offline again?

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
 
time flies like an arrow. fruit flies like a banana.
   -- groucho marx
 
spamtraps: madduck.bo...@madduck.net


digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

[notmuch] patchwork test instance (was: Git feature branch)

[Marten Veldthuis]

On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 11:31:12 +1300, martin f krafft  
wrote:
> Arguably, being patch-centric means that a project has a higher
> barrier of entry, but it also means that if someone wants something,
> they know that they'll have to somehow end up with a patch. The way
> this happens on Git is that you either write it yourself and bring
> it up to discussion (which is what patchwork facilitates), or
> constructively theorise the functionality until someone else
> submits a patch.

And don't forget, if you really want something on the longterm todo
list, you can always send in a patch for the TODO file. ;)

-- 
- Marten

[notmuch] patchwork test instance (was: Git feature branch)

[martin f krafft]

I investigated some patch/issue trackers over the weekend. Here's my
summary/reply.

The executive summary is that
http://patchwork.madduck.net/project/notmuch/list/ now exists.
I have not really used it for anything real, so if some of you feel
inclined to give it a shot, sign up and triage away! Feedback
welcome.

also sprach James Rowe  [2010.01.28.2005 +1300]:
>   Roundup has command line and email interfaces.  The email interface is
> quite similar to debian's.  I've never used a launchpad hosted project
> so I can't compare it.

Roundup is an issue tracker, while Patchwork is a patch tracker.
They are fundamentally distinct, but there are overlaps. What led me
to go the Patchwork-path is that projects like the kernel and Git
don't use issue trackers but work entirely patch-based.

I don't know if that is the right way to do things, but having an
issue tracker that fills up with bugs and wishlist items lacking
patches is no better in the long run than not having an issue
tracker.

Arguably, being patch-centric means that a project has a higher
barrier of entry, but it also means that if someone wants something,
they know that they'll have to somehow end up with a patch. The way
this happens on Git is that you either write it yourself and bring
it up to discussion (which is what patchwork facilitates), or
constructively theorise the functionality until someone else
submits a patch.

>   Google's codereview tool has a nice interface for collecting and
> commenting on patches, but I suspect that suggestion will also meet with
> a degree of friction.  To me codereview feels like patchwork with
> polish.

Maybe you could take some ideas from codereview and inform the
patchwork people about them?

>   Both gitorious and github have commenting functionality built in.
> Commenting on commits in a fork is as easy as opening the commit in
> a browser.  I use something along the lines of the following script to
> open commits on github:
> 
> #! /bin/sh
> BASE=$(git config remote.${2:-origin}.url | sed 
> 's,git\(@\|://\)\([^:/]*\)[:/]\(.*\).git,http://\2/\3/commit,')
> COMMIT=$(git rev-parse ${1:-HEAD})
> sensible-browser ${BASE}/${COMMIT}
> 
>   Using github or gitorious you can easily find and track forks from one
> place as well, which makes discovering new work much easier.  Github
> even provides a pretty single page interface to the work going on in
> other forks, gitorious requires a little more leg work to do the same
> but not much.

Git now has commit notes, but it doesn't seem like that's integrated
with Github/Gitorious.

Mind you, patchwork isn't integrated at all with Git. It should be
possible to set it up to automatically flag patches that are
accepted into mainline, next, or pu.

The benefit of patchwork is that discussion isn't moved to the web,
but patchwork hooks into the mailing list, so discussion can stay
where it should IMHO be.

>   For a couple of hosted projects we use at the office we email the
> individual entries from http://github.com/$user/$project/comments.atom
> to the mailing list so they're /forcibly/ seen by everybody :)

Right, but replying requires them to open a browser and be online at
the time, right?



Anyway, I suggest we give patchwork a try. It occurs to me that
notmuch can pretty much do all of what patchwork is doing ? after
all, it's just tagging patches/threads, but until we have
synchronisable tags and a mailing list archive based on notmuch
(which could then replace patchwork), I think we'll need to employ
a third tool.

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/

"what's your conceptual continuity? --
 well, it should be easy to see:
 the crux of the bisquit is the apopstrophe!"
-- frank zappa

spamtraps: madduck.bogus at madduck.net
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
URL: 

[notmuch] patchwork test instance (was: Git feature branch)

[martin f krafft]

I investigated some patch/issue trackers over the weekend. Here's my
summary/reply.

The executive summary is that
http://patchwork.madduck.net/project/notmuch/list/ now exists.
I have not really used it for anything real, so if some of you feel
inclined to give it a shot, sign up and triage away! Feedback
welcome.

also sprach James Rowe jnr...@gmail.com [2010.01.28.2005 +1300]:
   Roundup has command line and email interfaces.  The email interface is
 quite similar to debian's.  I've never used a launchpad hosted project
 so I can't compare it.

Roundup is an issue tracker, while Patchwork is a patch tracker.
They are fundamentally distinct, but there are overlaps. What led me
to go the Patchwork-path is that projects like the kernel and Git
don't use issue trackers but work entirely patch-based.

I don't know if that is the right way to do things, but having an
issue tracker that fills up with bugs and wishlist items lacking
patches is no better in the long run than not having an issue
tracker.

Arguably, being patch-centric means that a project has a higher
barrier of entry, but it also means that if someone wants something,
they know that they'll have to somehow end up with a patch. The way
this happens on Git is that you either write it yourself and bring
it up to discussion (which is what patchwork facilitates), or
constructively theorise the functionality until someone else
submits a patch.

   Google's codereview tool has a nice interface for collecting and
 commenting on patches, but I suspect that suggestion will also meet with
 a degree of friction.  To me codereview feels like patchwork with
 polish.

Maybe you could take some ideas from codereview and inform the
patchwork people about them?

   Both gitorious and github have commenting functionality built in.
 Commenting on commits in a fork is as easy as opening the commit in
 a browser.  I use something along the lines of the following script to
 open commits on github:
 
 #! /bin/sh
 BASE=$(git config remote.${2:-origin}.url | sed 
 's,git\(@\|://\)\([^:/]*\)[:/]\(.*\).git,http://\2/\3/commit,')
 COMMIT=$(git rev-parse ${1:-HEAD})
 sensible-browser ${BASE}/${COMMIT}
 
   Using github or gitorious you can easily find and track forks from one
 place as well, which makes discovering new work much easier.  Github
 even provides a pretty single page interface to the work going on in
 other forks, gitorious requires a little more leg work to do the same
 but not much.

Git now has commit notes, but it doesn't seem like that's integrated
with Github/Gitorious.

Mind you, patchwork isn't integrated at all with Git. It should be
possible to set it up to automatically flag patches that are
accepted into mainline, next, or pu.

The benefit of patchwork is that discussion isn't moved to the web,
but patchwork hooks into the mailing list, so discussion can stay
where it should IMHO be.

   For a couple of hosted projects we use at the office we email the
 individual entries from http://github.com/$user/$project/comments.atom
 to the mailing list so they're /forcibly/ seen by everybody :)

Right, but replying requires them to open a browser and be online at
the time, right?



Anyway, I suggest we give patchwork a try. It occurs to me that
notmuch can pretty much do all of what patchwork is doing — after
all, it's just tagging patches/threads, but until we have
synchronisable tags and a mailing list archive based on notmuch
(which could then replace patchwork), I think we'll need to employ
a third tool.

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
 
what's your conceptual continuity? --
 well, it should be easy to see:
 the crux of the bisquit is the apopstrophe!
-- frank zappa
 
spamtraps: madduck.bo...@madduck.net


digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch