From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A4DCE01385 for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2012 04:30:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Feb 2012 04:30:36 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="123053538" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.123.13]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Feb 2012 04:30:35 -0800 From: Paul Eggleton To: yocto@yoctoproject.org Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:30:34 +0000 Message-ID: <1636213.TrTs1YKXOm@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.8.0 (Linux/3.0.0-15-generic-pae; KDE/4.8.0; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <4F323C52.8030304@intel.com> <4F3302D3.7070507@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Koen Kooi Subject: Re: Upstream-Status finally @ 100% X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:30:37 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Thursday 09 February 2012 13:22:10 Koen Kooi wrote: > I find the 'pending' confusing, is it 'pending submission' or 'pending > approval'? I'm marking patches in meta-oe with 'Upstream-status: Unknown' > as default instead of 'Pending' to make it a bit clearer. And patches > marked 'inappropriate' won't go in, it's 'rejected', 'unknown' or 'needs > work' in those cases. I'm not going to guess what upstream might think of > it, since I can't speak for them. I think the distinction between Pending and Unknown is important. The status is not completely unknown - the person who set it made an assessment that the patch should be appropriate for sending upstream, even if it would need further cleanup beforehand. Maybe "Pending" isn't the best word, I'm not sure, but "Unknown" is not right either. > All patches in OE-core now have an Upstream-status, but how many have an > *incorrect* Upstream-status? The status ought to be correct with regard to the patch author's assessment of whether or not the patch can go upstream. That's what matters - it's a tool you can use in the separate exercise of going through the patches we do have and trying to get them merged upstream. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre