From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Monitoring the status of your own patches on patchwork?
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 08:06:25 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211213080625.7febffc2@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877dc8fqui.fsf@toke.dk>
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:48:37 +0100 Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> > Status notification when checks are failing? Hopefully not, we don't
> > want people posting patches just to get them tested...
>
> Well no, but sometimes a patch will have failures despite the best
> efforts of the submitter (otherwise what's the point of the checks?).
> Right now the only way for me to discover that there's an issue is to go
> look at the patchwork web interface, and I wanted something that better
> suits my workflow (i.e., that's not in a web browser).
I think that the maintainer should notify the submitter about
the reason the patch state was changed (with the exception of
patches for a different tree, maybe). I know Kees has been
trying to add more meaningful states to patchwork but I can
never guess the meaning of those either :S So no automated
state checker can replace the maintainer's reply.
> I wasn't asking for patchwork to send out automatic notifications
> (yikes!), I just wanted to know if anyone else had done something
> similar before I go play around with the patchwork API myself... :)
Despite the promise of "best effort" I fear such automation.
It's pretty common in (let's call them) modern workflows to
submit PRs / post changes just to get them tested by a CI.
We don't want to give people the impression that the mailing
list can serve this purpose.
Obviously I can't stop you from writing your local code :)
just trying to widen the perspective.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-13 16:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-11 19:06 Monitoring the status of your own patches on patchwork? Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-12-13 15:08 ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-12-13 15:48 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-12-13 16:06 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2021-12-13 18:39 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-12-13 22:56 ` Kees Cook
2021-12-13 18:37 ` Simon Glass
2021-12-13 21:43 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-12-13 23:51 ` Simon Glass
2021-12-14 2:12 ` Randy Dunlap
2021-12-14 16:31 ` Simon Glass
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20211213080625.7febffc2@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).