From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 774ECC43331 for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 23:45:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16EAD21882 for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 23:45:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726281AbfKGXpa (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Nov 2019 18:45:30 -0500 Received: from cloudserver094114.home.pl ([79.96.170.134]:58793 "EHLO cloudserver094114.home.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725930AbfKGXpa (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Nov 2019 18:45:30 -0500 Received: from 79.184.254.83.ipv4.supernova.orange.pl (79.184.254.83) (HELO kreacher.localnet) by serwer1319399.home.pl (79.96.170.134) with SMTP (IdeaSmtpServer 0.83.292) id b2b2a0142d33df16; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 00:45:28 +0100 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Konstantin Ryabitsev Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC: using supersedes: trailer to indicate patch/series revision flow Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 00:45:27 +0100 Message-ID: <1779121.stEDml5jbt@kreacher> In-Reply-To: <20191107204349.hqpefgp7cowj6hof@chatter.i7.local> References: <20191107204349.hqpefgp7cowj6hof@chatter.i7.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: workflows-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, November 7, 2019 9:43:49 PM CET Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > Hi, all: > > The only mechanism we currently have for patch/series versioning is > subject suffixes. I think it would be useful to have a way to more > explicitly mark that a series obsoletes a previous version, and I > propose this is done with a `supersedes:` trailer at the end of the > cover letter or in the first patch of the series: All such things are a pain for patches generated by quilt, say. > E.g.: > > Initial patch: > > ---8<--- > From: Dev Eloper > Message-Id: <1572991351-86061-1-git-send-email-dev.eloper@example.com> > Subject: [PATCH] Change foo > > Foo is no good. Use Bar. > > Signed-off-by: Dev Eloper > --- > > foo | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/foo b/foo > ... > > base-commit: 23fdb198ae81f47a574296dab5167c5e136a02ba > -- > 2.24.0 > ---8<--- > > Follow-up patch: > > ---8<--- > From: Dev Eloper > Message-Id: <1572991352-86062-2-git-send-email-dev.eloper@example.com> > Subject: [PATCH,v2] Change foo > > Foo is no good. Use Bar. Also use baz. > > Signed-off-by: Dev Eloper > --- > > foo | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/foo b/foo > ... > > supersedes: <1572991351-86061-1-git-send-email-dev.eloper@example.com> > base-commit: 23fdb198ae81f47a574296dab5167c5e136a02ba > -- > 2.24.0 > ---8<--- > > Questions: > > 1. Should this be exposed via git-format-patch flags, or just used by > specialized tooling? I'd vote for specialized tooling (if anything). > 2. Should supersedes: link to the previous version of the patch, or the > first ever version of the patch? I am leaning towards the latter, And then how do you know that version 2 was superseded by version 3? > even though in this case the message-id largely becomes identical in > usage to Gerrit's Change-Id. > > 3. Should the supersedes trailer have: > a. message-id without brackets > b. message-id with brackets > c. https://lore.kernel.org/r/message-id > My preference is b, to match with The Message-Id header usage. An id of the exact patch (or series) superseded by this one IMO. Cheers!