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=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 B2F87C17441 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:14:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A321206A3 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:14:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="iIzcSS0b" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726958AbfKKPOr (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:14:47 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.81]:50066 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726811AbfKKPOq (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:14:46 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1573485286; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2TvGzvXdtELb36honQsv4enigX7jalIpQTIgCVxtcs0=; b=iIzcSS0bckiAEubsIbyV9yPliIjQAxfaM7uac+mGzSV0NwKm+QcHZam2mZe6+C+oSVDqTb yg/ud/9CNTXD73Yc/Ky2Jv369czyQ7llqZzvzrytcSYcgTxL+NjDEOhAo+UE9PTFIcsQfz Pe0lRC9BZ+l+8479n0It7uYZbxGXm44= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-139-n6kzGNGyN2K8aMNAA9pG_Q-1; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:14:42 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9B44DB60; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:14:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-124-101.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.124.101]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA808608E6; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:14:40 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:14:38 -0500 From: Don Zickus To: Dmitry Vyukov Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org, automated-testing@yoctoproject.org, Han-Wen Nienhuys , Konstantin Ryabitsev Subject: Re: [Automated-testing] Structured feeds Message-ID: <20191111151438.ei3wo4vfnabc25tx@redhat.com> References: <20191107205304.3myfwfhaviizgr73@redhat.com> <20191108145257.yb4fjfjc5yag6jqp@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-MC-Unique: n6kzGNGyN2K8aMNAA9pG_Q-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Sender: workflows-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 10:20:22AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > > Ok. Yeah, in my head I was thinking the data is largely right, just > > occasionally 1 or 2 fields was misrepresented due to bad client tool or > > human error in the text. > > > > In Red Hat was use internal metadata for checking our patches through o= ur > > process (namely Bugzilla id). It isn't unusual for someone to accident= ally > > fat-finger the bugzilla id when posting their patch. > > > > I was thinking if there is a follow-on 'type' that appends corrections = as you > > stated, say 'type: correction' that 'corrects the original data. This = would > > have to be linked through message-id or some unique identifier. > > > > Then I assume any tool that parses the feed 'j' would correlate all the= data > > based around some unique ids such that picking up corrections would jus= t be > > a natural extension? >=20 > Yes, this should be handled naturally in this model. Since it's not > possible to mutate any previously published info, everything is > represented as additions/corrections: adding a comment to a patch, > adding Reviewed-by, adding Nack, adding test results. The final state > of a patch is always reconstructed by "replaying" all messages > published regarding the patch. So naturally if we mis-parsed a message > as "Acked-by: X" and then corrected that to "Nacked-by: X" and > republished, whoever will replay the feed, should replace Acked-by > with Nacked-by. Great. That makes sense to me. Thanks! Cheers, Don