Re: [PATCH] scripts: check cc stable mailing list in commit

[Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>]

On 1/16/2017 9:51 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:54:14PM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 11/21/2016 10:43 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> Add a check for commits fixing a released bug.
>>> Such commits are found thanks to scripts/git-log-fixes.sh.
>>> They must be sent CC: stable@dpdk.org.
>>> In order to avoid forgetting CC, this mail header can be written
>>> in the git commit message.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
>>
>> I think this is useful, thanks for the patch.
> 
> Yes, it is. Thanks! (Sorry for late reply; hope it's not too late).
> 
>>> +[ -z "$bad" ] || printf "Should CC: stable@dpdk.org\n$bad\n"
>>
>> This is good for developer, but since "CC: xx" tags removed when patch
>> applied,
> 
> Again, I'd suggest to __not__ remove such tag. Firstly, why bother? And
> I will talk why this tag should be kept, as a stable tree maintainer.
> 
> At the beginning, when people are not used to add "cc: stable" tag, I used
> to pick bug fix commits from master by something like: list all bug fixing
> patches and pick those that appliable to previous release.
> 
> Later, kudos to Thomas, who wrote an handy script (git-log-fixes.sh) to
> do both, it indeeded make my life much easier. But it's still not enough.
> 
> It lists a lot of patches (206 fix patches, while 728 in total: the
> ratio is near 30%):
> 
>     $ devtools/git-log-fixes.sh v16.07..v16.11 | wc -l
>     206
>     
>     $ git rev-list v16.07..v16.11 | wc -l
>     728
> 
> Thus I dropped few of them, manually, resulting to 130 (still looks like
> a big number to me):
> 
>     $ git rev-list v16.07..v16.07.2 | wc -l
>     130
> 
> The policy I would expect is, leave this tag as it is, I then will apply
> all of them to a stable branch: I will no longer do the picking job. Instead,
> I may just need handle those can't apply cleanly and ask the author to
> do backport.

Won't all patches that has CC:stable... also would have Fixes: line?

> 
> It would be do-able now, as I saw a lot of people are getting used to add
> such tag. And even not, I saw those kind committers do that for them.
> 
> Besides, if there is already an explicit way, why should we stick on the
> implicit way?
> 
> 	--yliu
> 
>> this will generate warnings when run against existing history.
>>
>> I don't know what can be done for this.
>>
>> Or should we keep CC: tags in commit log perhaps?
>>
>>>