From: Ralph Boehme <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Namjae Jeon <email@example.com> Cc: Steve French <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Tom Talpey <email@example.com>, Jeremy Allison <firstname.lastname@example.org>, CIFS <email@example.com>, Ronnie Sahlberg <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Hyunchul Lee <email@example.com>, Sergey Senozhatsky <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] ksmbd: a bunch of patches Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 09:57:08 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAKYAXd8R2OQ3=m8HjUffph5+hw_D2KaT60ZDsYmEtCqEFE3gQQ@mail.gmail.com> [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2398 bytes --] Am 30.09.21 um 02:32 schrieb Namjae Jeon: > 2021-09-30 2:18 GMT+09:00, Ralph Boehme <firstname.lastname@example.org>: >> as said before: just don't do the merge there, just the review. That's >> the way Samba has been doing it for years. Are you actually aware of the >> current Samba workflow? > Is it friendly to new developers? yes. It's just a different tooling you have to wrap your head around. In the case of Samba it has the added benefit, that every interested contributor can make use of the full Samba CI. This works by using a shared repo on gitlab where every registered developer (so you have to ask to be added, but this is freely granted) where you push your patchset to a branch name prefixed with your username (to avoid stepping on someone else's branch). That triggers an automated *full* CI run, so new contributors can be sure not to waste time of other developers before asking for review. > I know samba workflow now too. New > developers can do everything easily by simply subscribing to the > mailing list. Sure, instead of pushing the resulting patchset from the review of your patchset to a github branch, I could send my patchset to the ML. Having now used a more a different workflow for a few years, I appreciate how much more natural it feels to share, work on and review code with a tooling that is much more intergrated to git. So what I'd like to propose for now is let's stick to the ML for now, next time I will send my patchset to the ML instead, but let's also consider and maybe test different possible toolings. > And do we review only the SMB protocol on github? If we > review and discuss kernel common code usage and touching, it should be > visible to the component kernel maintainers as well. > > And is the review history likely to be discarded on github? I don't think so, I'm not 100% sure on this though. But as it's NOT discarded on gitlab, I guess github will match feature wise. > Doesn't it > get thrown away the moment you change or update a patch? Also, review > discussions left on each individual's github cannot be easily searched > like mailing list. Yeah, but does that really matter? So far this was not missed in the Samba gitlab tooling. -slow -- Ralph Boehme, Samba Team https://samba.org/ SerNet Samba Team Lead https://sernet.de/en/team-samba [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 840 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-30 7:57 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-09-26 13:55 Namjae Jeon 2021-09-26 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] ksmbd: add the check to vaildate if stream protocol length exceeds maximum value Namjae Jeon 2021-09-26 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] ksmbd: add validation in smb2_ioctl Namjae Jeon 2021-09-26 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] ksmbd: add request buffer validation in smb2_set_info Namjae Jeon 2021-09-26 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] ksmbd: check strictly data area in ksmbd_smb2_check_message() Namjae Jeon 2021-09-26 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] ksmbd: add validation in smb2 negotiate Namjae Jeon 2021-09-26 14:27 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] ksmbd: a bunch of patches Ralph Boehme 2021-09-26 15:32 ` Namjae Jeon 2021-09-27 15:42 ` Ralph Boehme 2021-09-27 23:57 ` Namjae Jeon 2021-09-28 3:26 ` Ralph Boehme 2021-09-28 13:43 ` Ralph Boehme 2021-09-28 14:23 ` Namjae Jeon 2021-09-28 16:33 ` Ralph Boehme 2021-09-28 17:33 ` Jeremy Allison 2021-09-29 15:28 ` Tom Talpey 2021-09-29 15:42 ` Jeremy Allison 2021-09-29 16:38 ` Ralph Boehme 2021-09-29 16:45 ` Tom Talpey 2021-09-29 17:08 ` Ralph Boehme 2021-09-29 17:11 ` Steve French 2021-09-29 17:18 ` Ralph Boehme 2021-09-30 0:32 ` Namjae Jeon 2021-09-30 0:51 ` Hyunchul Lee 2021-09-30 7:57 ` Ralph Boehme [this message] 2021-09-28 23:27 ` Namjae Jeon
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 \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --subject='Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] ksmbd: a bunch of patches' \ /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
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.