On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 04:26:55PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Sat, 24 May 2025 at 15:51, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 03:39:35PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > On Sat, 24 May 2025 at 15:35, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > On Sat, 24 May 2025 at 15:31, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 03:22:57PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 24 May 2025 at 15:18, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 05:23:48AM +0100, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 23 May 2025 at 22:25, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 09:20:37PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 23 May 2025 at 17:47, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 05:32:36PM +0100, Simon Glass > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 23 May 2025 at 15:04, Tom Rini > > > > > > > > > > > > <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 08:19:30AM -0500, Simon Glass > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is easier for tests if the top-level control > > > > > > > > > > > > > > logic is all in one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > module. Create a new do_patman() function to handle > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this. Move the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > existing code into it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (no changes since v1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tools/patman/__main__.py | 49 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ++---------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tools/patman/control.py | 54 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Applied to sjg/master, thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Odd. I thought you had posted this against master or > > > > > > > > > > > > > next, intending it > > > > > > > > > > > > > for mainline, which is why I assigned it to you in > > > > > > > > > > > > > patchwork. I see the > > > > > > > > > > > > > cover letter is missing what commit it's against. And > > > > > > > > > > > > > instead here you > > > > > > > > > > > > > are once again spamming the list and with messages > > > > > > > > > > > > > about your personal > > > > > > > > > > > > > tree. Why? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm applying it to my tree and intend to send you a PR > > > > > > > > > > > > at some point, > > > > > > > > > > > > with collected tools/ patches. So I believe I need to > > > > > > > > > > > > send emails > > > > > > > > > > > > about applying things and update it in patchwork. Let's > > > > > > > > > > > > discuss this > > > > > > > > > > > > in a future call. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see what there is to discuss. Please follow the > > > > > > > > > > > normal process > > > > > > > > > > > for mainline and stop spamming the list with notices for > > > > > > > > > > > your personal > > > > > > > > > > > tree. You're also diverging your own tree further from > > > > > > > > > > > mainline by doing > > > > > > > > > > > this and making it less likely (multiple people have told > > > > > > > > > > > you they don't > > > > > > > > > > > want to review things not against mainline) any follow-up > > > > > > > > > > > work will get > > > > > > > > > > > comments other than that it's not applicable to mainline. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For patman, I have another series [1] I'm planning to apply > > > > > > > > > > to my tree tomorrow > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would you like me to send 'applied' emails for it to the > > > > > > > > > > mailing list? > > > > > > > > > > Or perhaps just for the cover letter? Would you like me to > > > > > > > > > > send you a > > > > > > > > > > pull request? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=456256 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that's another series that while I disagree with the > > > > > > > > > direction > > > > > > > > > you're taking things, would rather apply to mainline than let > > > > > > > > > it bitrot > > > > > > > > > in mainline. So please send a PR against next. And that would > > > > > > > > > also apply > > > > > > > > > to the series this email is in reply to. As again, I had > > > > > > > > > expected it for > > > > > > > > > mainline and not your downstream tree even if I think we (and > > > > > > > > > our users) > > > > > > > > > would all benefit from managing the python portions > > > > > > > > > differently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, once I have applied the remaining two series I will send a > > > > > > > > PR. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Based on the emails in my inbox this morning, you're doing the > > > > > > > opposite > > > > > > > of what I asked for. But maybe this afternoon will bring something > > > > > > > different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You didn't express a preference for the 'applied' emails. It > > > > > > > > seems > > > > > > > > better to send these emails so that there is a record of the > > > > > > > > patch > > > > > > > > being applied. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess I wasn't clear enough. Stop spamming the list with > > > > > > > *anything* > > > > > > > about your personal tree. And if you're going to send anything > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > something that's intended for mainline, you should make patman > > > > > > > act more > > > > > > > like b4 and NOT send a message to every patch. I know I used to, > > > > > > > but the > > > > > > > workflow b4 enables is much better for everyone. > > > > > > > > > > > > How do I (or anyone else) know whether a patch was applied? If you > > > > > > only reply to the cover letter, doesn't that mean that the patches > > > > > > are > > > > > > left 'hanging' in the mailing list? > > > > > > > > > > > > I didn't know you had changed your policy on this...it certainly > > > > > > seems > > > > > > odd to me. I often find Heinrich's patches are 'silently' applied, > > > > > > so > > > > > > perhaps he does the same thing? > > > > > > > > > > Every custodian does things as they see fit for mainline, but most are > > > > > adopting b4 which means that no, I'm not sure why there would be > > > > > confusion, or where it would come from. The emails say what the commit > > > > > ranges are for a series, patchwork is updated and then periodically > > > > > most > > > > > patches in patchwork then get their githash added. Replying to the > > > > > cover > > > > > letter with the commit range for the series means it's very much not > > > > > "hanging". > > > > > > > > Generally I rely on seeing a reply to a patch to know it was applied. > > > > So it is confusing when the patch goes in but there was no reply to > > > > the patch. > > > > > > > > I've noticed that you seem less inclined to apply some patches from a > > > > series, instead requesting that the whole series is resent. Perhaps > > > > that is why? > > > > > > Also, was there an announcement about this change? If so, could you > > > please point me to it? > > > > I don't see why there would be an announcement? Now, again, please stop > > posting things to the public mailing list about your tree. I'm not the > > only person who has told you it's not helpful. > > > > I mean heck, a big part of the problem is that you keep replying to > > patches you posted for your tree and spamming the rest of the community > > about it. I can't tell if you're acting in bad faith or not anymore. > > It's just that I am trying to work with your tree in areas where I'm > not blocked, to minimise the delta.
This is a confusing statement to make in response to an area that you were not blocked on (since I had said several times I would take) and you increased the delta. > Most of the patches apply fine to -next . I could perhaps update the > tooling to indicate that. Would that help? Most is the wrong number. Everything needs to apply, cleanly. > I'm thinking of adding a feature to patman to support multiple > 'target' upstreams. This seems like a whole lot more work than just only posting things from a tree that's based on the correct branch of mainline. If "git show" doesn't include whatever the hash is in mainline, it doesn't belong on the list. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
