From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>,
patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFE: use patchwork to submit a patch
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 09:19:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191012071911.GA2034802@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191011213553.g3pleurh5uomumi7@chatter.i7.local>
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 05:35:53PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 09:23:08PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> > > (This is the same reason I generally disagree with Eric Wong about
> > > preserving SMTP as the primary transmission protocol -- I've heard lots of
> > > complaints both from kernel developers and especially from people trying to
> > > contribute to CAF about corporate policies actually making it impossible to
> > > submit patches -- and no, using a different mail server is not a possibility
> > > for them because it can be a firing offense under their IT AUP rules.)
> >
> > I'm not opposed to a webmail interface tailored to kernel hacking
> > which does stuff like checkpatch.pl and get_maintainer.pl before
> > sending (similar to your patchwork proposal and
> > gitgadgetgadget). That would get around security appliances
> > but SMTP would still be used in the background.
> >
> > Or offer full-blown HTTPS webmail + IMAP + SMTP access like any
> > other webmail provider + checkpatch + get_maintainer helpers.
>
> Well, this is the bit where I say that it may not be allowed by corporate
> rules. I see this all the time in CAF/Android world where companies
> *require* that all email goes through their SMTP server so that it can be
> properly logged (often for legal reasons). And it is often equally required
> that any code submissions come from person@corporate.com and not
> person@free-email-provider.com for License/CLA reasons, so setting up a
> webmail server is not a solution either.
>
> This is basically why SMTP sucks in my view -- and it's worthless trying to
> pick fights with IT departments, because they are told to do so by lawyers.
> So, I want to take SMTP out of the equation:
>
> 1. provide a way for someone to submit a patch using a web interface (but
> still in a way that From: is their corporate ID)
If you do this, what happens when a maintainer/reviewer responds to that
patch and says "looks good, but can you change X and resend it?"
How will they get that message if it didn't go through their email
system? How will they be able to respond to it?
> 2. use individual git feeds as a way to send out patches instead of always
> being secondary to SMTP
Sending patches that way is one thing, the interaction based on those
patches is another.
Everyone needs to remember that only 1/3 of the patches submitted are
applied. The "normal" path of development is at least a review/resend
cycle for submissions (2/3 of patches). So that 2/3 can't be ignored as
the "new/drive-by submissions" are probably more in that category than
not.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-12 7:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 96+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-10 14:41 RFE: use patchwork to submit a patch Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-10 18:07 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-10 19:42 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-10 19:53 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-10 20:05 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-10 20:21 ` Jonathan Nieder
2019-10-10 20:36 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-11 18:05 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-10 20:20 ` Jonathan Nieder
2019-10-10 21:38 ` Daniel Axtens
2019-10-10 22:05 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-11 8:57 ` Greg KH
2019-10-11 17:20 ` Shuah Khan
2019-10-11 17:37 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-11 18:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-11 18:32 ` David Miller
2019-10-11 18:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-11 18:51 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-11 18:59 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-11 19:02 ` Drew DeVault
2019-10-11 19:11 ` David Miller
2019-10-11 21:19 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-10-11 21:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-11 22:54 ` Dave Airlie
2019-10-11 23:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-12 0:08 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-10-12 0:14 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-13 23:38 ` Daniel Axtens
2019-10-14 10:42 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-10-14 12:26 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-14 13:18 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-10-14 13:41 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-14 13:53 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-14 14:28 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-14 15:25 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-14 12:27 ` Daniel Axtens
2019-10-14 13:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-14 14:58 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-14 15:12 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 4:49 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 16:30 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-14 15:17 ` Greg KH
2019-10-14 15:27 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 4:41 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 16:07 ` Greg KH
2019-10-14 20:56 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-15 4:39 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 12:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-15 13:35 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-15 14:05 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-15 15:21 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-15 16:37 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 16:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-21 15:39 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-24 13:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-24 13:33 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-24 13:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-24 14:12 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 8:57 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-15 9:11 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 16:24 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 16:27 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-21 11:16 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-08 9:44 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-08 14:02 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-11-08 14:11 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-08 14:12 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-08 14:17 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-11-08 14:25 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-09 4:31 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-11-11 9:35 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-11 12:08 ` Mark Brown
2019-11-11 16:17 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-11-11 20:38 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-11-08 14:17 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-11 20:02 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-11 21:23 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-11 21:35 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-12 7:19 ` Greg KH [this message]
2019-10-14 11:31 ` Mark Brown
2019-10-15 16:11 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-13 23:39 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-14 7:30 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-14 22:18 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-15 15:34 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-14 15:33 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 15:40 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-15 16:32 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 16:34 ` Drew DeVault
2019-10-15 16:44 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 17:07 ` Drew DeVault
2019-10-15 17:24 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-11 22:57 ` Dave Airlie
2019-10-12 7:31 ` Greg KH
2019-10-12 13:16 ` Stephen Finucane
2019-10-12 16:13 ` Stephen Finucane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191012071911.GA2034802@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=e@80x24.org \
--cc=patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).