From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9E01FA4 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 16:38:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io1-f65.google.com (mail-io1-f65.google.com [209.85.166.65]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 383A689E for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 16:38:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f65.google.com with SMTP id l7so21514990ioj.6 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 09:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-f53.google.com (mail-io1-f53.google.com. [209.85.166.53]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j25sm3052383ioj.67.2019.08.23.09.38.26 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 23 Aug 2019 09:38:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f53.google.com with SMTP id 18so21419881ioe.10 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 09:38:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190823013619.GA8130@mit.edu> <20190823151843.GH8130@mit.edu> In-Reply-To: From: Doug Anderson Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 09:38:11 -0700 Message-ID: To: Thomas Gleixner Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Joel Fernandes , Barret Rhoden , ksummit , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jonathan Nieder , Tomasz Figa , Han-Wen Nienhuys , Theodore Tso , David Rientjes , Dmitry Torokhov , Dmitry Vyukov Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Allowing something Change-Id (or something like it) in kernel commits List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 8:59 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, Doug Anderson wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 8:31 AM Sean Paul wrote: > > > Personally I'd rather keep Change-Id as-is with no link because it > > > means that those who already have a workflow can keep using it and > > > just stop stripping Change-Id. However, if people really want a link > > > we can make one up. Remember, though, that at the time of posting v1 > > > that link points to NOWHERE. THERE IS NO SERVER. Thus you are > > > speculating that (presumably) that link will find the patch you posted > > > because you know that the list will be scraped by a bot. > > > > > > NOTE: I suppose I could do this today: > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/?q=Change-Id%3A+I23e218cd964f16c0b2b26127d4a5ca6529867673 > > > > > > ...and it would work. Ironically Mark yelled about that not providing > > > any use outside of the company's system, but I just effectively used > > > it to find v1 and v2 of the patch and also link it to what landed in > > > the kernel tree (where, apparently, Mark missed stripping the > > > Change-Id). ...and the "discussion" about the patch. > > > > As I said to Sean: > > > > Put the change id into the discard section of your patch mail or into > > the cover letter. So it's in the archive and if we really can agree on > > having the > > > > Link://lkml.kernel.org/r/$MSGID_PER_PATCH > > > > in the actual commit, then Linus is happy and you have your gerrit ID > > via a mouse click or just via that search you have above. > > And that avoids also the discussion about public/private references as > neither the cover letter nor the discard section are part of the actual > commit message. If it is agreed upon to: 1. Make it allowed or suggested to put a well-formed (machine parseable) Change-Id "after the cut" on mailing list posts, which would allow you to associate v1, v2, and v3. 2. Add "Link://lkml.kernel.org/r/$MSGID_PER_PATCH" to landed patches, which would allow you to recover the Change-Id even after a patch lands. ...then I will be happy (ish). The biggest downside I see here is that it is much less likely that random committers out there will get this right. The way committers naturally have the same Change-Id from v1 to v2 to v3 is because it's part of the commit message and when you amend to a previous change it stays there. That means that these people will need to remember to move the Change-Id to "after the cut" unless we teach git-send-email to do this for you (though I guess maybe we could do that?). -Doug