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=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 60594C432C1 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 18:37:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE62C214DA for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 18:37:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=cmpwn.com header.i=@cmpwn.com header.b="siOfhE6l" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2436908AbfIXSh3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Sep 2019 14:37:29 -0400 Received: from mail.cmpwn.com ([45.56.77.53]:39904 "EHLO mail.cmpwn.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2392031AbfIXSh3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Sep 2019 14:37:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=cmpwn.com; s=cmpwn; t=1569350249; bh=xt52Sl/sfHYAentq+gX8JAxz7PPrBlHIrJtnWZNng4c=; h=In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:From:To; b=siOfhE6lMBTYatLU6HM92YUGPjaU8Ho5zFCKM7V+lm/8+M/3Yyf9i7eQeCQ1TYJ5b 3FMPxgmGuFA2oF9Xk9fc/lZjTHU50trvi+TjNa1N/MVgi3FAbIWAGD7Ojls7wKdXz/ 0MSND3wvLUG/FftNQ/JSjJdoZj2XaZCPsqihm0tM= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 In-Reply-To: <20190924182536.GC6041@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 14:37:28 -0400 Subject: Re: thoughts on a Merge Request based development workflow From: "Drew DeVault" To: "Neil Horman" , Message-Id: Sender: workflows-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org On Tue Sep 24, 2019 at 2:25 PM Neil Horman wrote: > After hearing at LPC that that there was a group investigating moving > some upstream development to a less email-centric workfow, I wanted to sh= are > this with the group: >=20 > https://gitlab.com/nhorman/git-lab-porcelain >=20 > Its still very rough, and is focused on working with RH based workflows > currently, but it can pretty easily be adapted to generic projects, if th= eres > interest, as well as to other services besides gitlab (github/etc). >=20 > The principle is pretty straightforward (at least currently), its a git > porcelain that wraps up the notion of creating a merge request with sendi= ng > patch emails. It uses the gitlab rest api to fork projects, and manipula= te MR's > in sync with email patch posting. It also contains an email listener dae= mon to > monitor reqisite lists for ACK/NACK responses which can then be translate= d into > MR metadata for true MR approvals/notifications to the maintainer that a = branch > is good to merge. This is a great idea. > Ostensibly, if this has any sort of legs, the idea in the long term is to= add > the ability to use the porcelain to do reviews on the command line, and > eventually phase out email entirely, but I think thats a significant way = off > here. Until this part. Phasing out email in favor of a centralized solution like Gitlab would be a stark regression.