Re: RFC: Superseded-by: follow-up trailer

[Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>]

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 07:46:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 02:24:49PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 01:07:51PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> 
> > > 3. b4 additionally learns a command to grab new trailers from the list by
> > >    matching the Obsoletes: message-ids and auto-amending commits with any new
> > >    trailers
> 
> > > This would allow you to start working on a new revision whenever you're ready
> > > for it and give b4 a precise match it can rely on when tracking new trailers.
> 
> > While I understand the interest in exact matching patches, I'm not
> > super keen on adding more headers to every patch - this feels alot
> > like the gerrit change-id header that everone hates, just in another
> > format.
> 
> The big issue people generally have with the gerrit change IDs is that
> they're only meaningful in the context of a gerrit instance that knows
> about that particular change ID, usually one on some corporate network,
> and no tooling other than gerrit uses them.  Message IDs are much more
> generally useful.

Well, IMHO, a chain of "obsoletes" is a fairly hacky way to create a
stable ID for a single commit to assist tooling. The gerrit idea of
applying a stable id to every commit is much more useful. If we had
that lore could index those stable IDs and the problem Konstantin is
chasing here becomes fairly simple to resolve by searching the index
for other messages related to the stable ID.

In turn if lore indexes the stable ID then storing the stable ID in
the commits becomes useful because lore can turn up everything related
to it, not just the single message that was used to make the commit.

Jason