From: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFE: use patchwork to submit a patch
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 16:58:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACT4Y+aYn57hQ4do0jvUGm-0C02UuDSwWeZL=M6XAaZjS51Jyw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f41e7a81-54f4-d4e8-b3c0-d98608fc4bdc@linuxfoundation.org>
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 7:20 PM Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On 10/11/19 2:57 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:41:50AM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> >> Hi, all:
> >>
> >> I would like to propose a new (large) feature to patchwork with the goal to
> >> make the process of submitting a patch easier for newbies and people
> >> generally less familiar with patch-based development. This was discussed
> >> previously on the workflows list:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/workflows/20190930202451.GA14403@pure.paranoia.local/
> >>
> >> How I envision this would work:
> >>
> >> - user creates an account (which requires a mail confirmation) >> - they choose a "submit patch" option from the menu
> >> - the patch submission screen has a succession of screens:
> >>
> >> 1. a screen with a single field allowing a user to paste a URL to their
> >> fork of the git repository. Once submitted, patchwork does a "git
> >> ls-remote" to attempt to get a list of refs and to verify that this is
> >> indeed a valid git repository
> >
> > s/valid git repository/valid git repository based on the kernel git tree/
> >
> > Otherwise you might be sending out lots of emails for other projects :)
> >
> >>
> >> 2. next screen asks the user to select the ref to work from using the
> >> list obtained from the remote. Once submitted, patchwork performs a `git
> >> clone --reference` to clone the repository locally using a local fork of
> >> the same repo to minimize object transfer. This part requires that:
> >> a. patchwork project is configured with a path to a local fork,
> >> if this feature is enabled for a project
> >> b. that fork is kept current via some mechanism outside of
> >> patchwork (e.g. with grokmirror)
> >> c. there is some sanity-checking during the clone process to
> >> avoid abuse (e.g. a sane timeout, a tmpdir with limited size, etc
> >> -- other suggestions welcome)
> >>
> >> 3. next screen asks the user to pick a starting commit from the log.
> >> Once submitted, patchwork generates the patch from the commit provided
> >> to the tip of the branch selected by the user earlier,
> >> using git format-patch.
> >>
> >> 4. next screen asks the user to review the patch to make sure this is
> >> what they want to submit. Once confirmed, patchwork performs two
> >> admin-defined optional hooks:
> >>
> >> a. a hook to generate a list of cc's (e.g. get_maintainer.pl)
> >> b. a sanity check hook (e.g. checkpatch.pl)
> >
> > I will note that many "first patch" submissions are checkpatch.pl
> > cleanups for staging. When doing that, I require that they do "one
> > logical change per patch", which means that many of the individual
> > patches themselves will not be checkpatch.pl clean, because many lines
> > have multiple issues with them (tabs, spaces, format, length, etc.)
> >
> > So other than that minor thing, sounds interesting. It's hard to
> > determine just how difficult the whole "set up git and send a patch out"
> > process is for people these days given the _huge_ numbers of new
> > contributions we keep getting, and the numerous good tutorials we have
> > created that spell out exactly how to do this.
> >
> > So you might be "solving" a problem that we don't really have. It's
> > hard to tell :(
> >
>
> I agree with this. I don't think this a problem that is worth solving.
> When a new developer wants to send a patch, they don't need to create
> any accounts. They setup their email client and send patch.
>
> We have several resources that walk them through setting up email
> clients and sending patches. checkpatch.pl can be automated with
> git hooks.
>
> >> I know this is a pretty big RFE, and I would like to hear your thoughts
> >> about this. If there is general agreement that this is doable/good idea, I
> >> may be able to come up with funding for this development as part of the
> >> overall tooling improvement proposal.
> >
> > The workflow seems sane, and matches what most people do today, with the
> > exception that it "solves" the git send-email issue, right? Is that our
> > biggest barrier?
> >
> > I would recommend interviewing some of the recent kernel mentor project
> > and outreachy applicants first, to try to determine exactly what their
> > problems, if any, were with our development process. If they say that
> > this type of tool/workflow would have saved them hours of time and
> > energy, then that's a great indication that we should try to do this.
> >
>
> I would say considering the number of applicants to mentorship program
> and new developers it will be lot overhead to require them to create
> patchwork accounts, and it might even be hard overtime. A lot of them
> start out and drop out in the middle. With the current setup, nothing
> to cleanup.
>
> Setting up email clients and git hooks is one time task. It is the
> easiest of the learning curve for many new developers. New developers
> struggle with getting the change logs right, coding styles right, and
> responding to review comments and acting on them.
>
> These aren't something that can be automated and they just have to
> learn through experience of sending patches.
>
> My opinion based on contact with new developers as well running the
> mentorship program, I would sat this isn't something that needs
> solving.
>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
As one data point, I cannot send emails with git send-email anymore.
It used to work, then broke and I don't know how to fix it. Now it says:
5.7.8 Username and Password not accepted. Learn more at
5.7.8 https://support.google.com/mail/?p=BadCredentials
s10sm8376885wrr.5 - gsmtp
I suspect it has something to do with two factor auth.
So that's it: it cannot contribute to kernel right now.
I will not consider time spent fixing it as useful time investment.
Any kernel documentation that I can find for gmail, mentions config
that I am already using and that is not working:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/search.html?q=gmail&check_keywords=yes&area=default#
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/email-clients.html?highlight=gmail
As another data point, I spoke to KP Singh at the Plumbers. He is a
"returning" kernel developer (so already did this before), he said it
took him 3 days and 52 configurations changes (all were committed to
git, so was possible to count exactly) to setup mail client properly.
And he is "staffed" to do kernel work, I would expect that most people
who don't _have_ to do kernel contributions will turn away half-way.
As another data point, several people told me that they are afraid of
sending kernel patches b/c there is so much "on you" to do right.
I would say that we need to aim at a process that does not require a
friendly experienced person to answer any of your questions in the
common case. Lots of people will simply not ask any questions.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-14 14:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 96+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-10 14:41 RFE: use patchwork to submit a patch Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-10 18:07 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-10 19:42 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-10 19:53 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-10 20:05 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-10 20:21 ` Jonathan Nieder
2019-10-10 20:36 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-11 18:05 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-10 20:20 ` Jonathan Nieder
2019-10-10 21:38 ` Daniel Axtens
2019-10-10 22:05 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-11 8:57 ` Greg KH
2019-10-11 17:20 ` Shuah Khan
2019-10-11 17:37 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-11 18:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-11 18:32 ` David Miller
2019-10-11 18:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-11 18:51 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-11 18:59 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-11 19:02 ` Drew DeVault
2019-10-11 19:11 ` David Miller
2019-10-11 21:19 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-10-11 21:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-11 22:54 ` Dave Airlie
2019-10-11 23:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-12 0:08 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-10-12 0:14 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-13 23:38 ` Daniel Axtens
2019-10-14 10:42 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-10-14 12:26 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-14 13:18 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-10-14 13:41 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-14 13:53 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-14 14:28 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2019-10-14 15:25 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-14 12:27 ` Daniel Axtens
2019-10-14 13:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-14 14:58 ` Dmitry Vyukov [this message]
2019-10-14 15:12 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 4:49 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 16:30 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-14 15:17 ` Greg KH
2019-10-14 15:27 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 4:41 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 16:07 ` Greg KH
2019-10-14 20:56 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-15 4:39 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 12:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-15 13:35 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-15 14:05 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-15 15:21 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-15 16:37 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 16:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-21 15:39 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-24 13:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-24 13:33 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-24 13:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-24 14:12 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 8:57 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-15 9:11 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-10-15 16:24 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 16:27 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-21 11:16 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-08 9:44 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-08 14:02 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-11-08 14:11 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-08 14:12 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-08 14:17 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-11-08 14:25 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-09 4:31 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-11-11 9:35 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2019-11-11 12:08 ` Mark Brown
2019-11-11 16:17 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-11-11 20:38 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-11-08 14:17 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-11 20:02 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-11 21:23 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-11 21:35 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-12 7:19 ` Greg KH
2019-10-14 11:31 ` Mark Brown
2019-10-15 16:11 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-13 23:39 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-14 7:30 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-14 22:18 ` Eric Wong
2019-10-15 15:34 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-14 15:33 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 15:40 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-15 16:32 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 16:34 ` Drew DeVault
2019-10-15 16:44 ` Laurent Pinchart
2019-10-15 17:07 ` Drew DeVault
2019-10-15 17:24 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-10-11 22:57 ` Dave Airlie
2019-10-12 7:31 ` Greg KH
2019-10-12 13:16 ` Stephen Finucane
2019-10-12 16:13 ` Stephen Finucane
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='CACT4Y+aYn57hQ4do0jvUGm-0C02UuDSwWeZL=M6XAaZjS51Jyw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--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).