[U-Boot] Application of patch submitted during the previous Merge Window

[Stefano Babic]

On 09/23/2011 11:21 AM, Graeme Russ wrote:

>>> Just wondering how we should be tracking said patches - Do you want us to
>>> ping you when the Merge Window opens, or do you have them nicely piled up
>>> in Patchwork ready to apply?
>>
>> Also in theory, most of the patches should go through the respective
>> custodians, so only a minimal remainder should be on my stack.
>>
>>
>> Also, many of the patches are RFC's, that go through several
>> iterations, and it is not always clear (to me) when they reach a state
>> when they should be applied.
> 
> Well my two console patches are ready for the next merge window - I notice
> you have not claimed them, so I'll ping you when it opens
> 
>> I have to admit that I am disappointed about patchwork.  Only very few
>> of the custodians actually use it.  Normally they should "grab"
>> (assign to themself) patches that fall into their responsibility.
>> Normally everybody should marks patches where they request changes oin
>> the ML as "Changes Requested".  They should set patches to "accepted"
>> or "Waiting upstream" or ... when they deal with them.  They should
>> also occasionally go through the list and mark superseded patches etc.
>> as such.

Maybe we have to start updating patchwork directly after sending our
answers to the ML to maintain the tool synchron. I was used to update
patchwork after answering several messages to the ML and, well, it is
common to forget to update some patches to the new status. It take more
time, but the only way that works with me is to update patchwork after
each answer, and not at the end...

> 
> Well I have a few niggles with Patchwork:
>  - It failed to see one patch in one of my multi-patch series
>  - Even though I kept the 'in-reply-to' chain intact, it still has the
>    individual versions of my console patches (it should just update the
>    existing patch)
>  - I cannot even find phylib: remove a couple of redundant code lines
>    (submitted 06/09/11 by Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz at mleia.com>)

I cannot see this patch on the mailing list, too. I can see a patch with
the same name submitted a day before at 05/09/11. And I can find it in
patchwork:

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/113414/

>> Also any volunteers to help out.  There are many areas where help
>> could be needed.
>>
>> - We need a new network custodian.
>>
>> - We could need some "trivial patch monkeys" that pick up trivial
>>   patches (like cosmetic changes cleaning up coding style things etc.,
>>   documentation changes etc.) so I just can pull that stuff.
> 
> Maybe the load can be spread here - maintainers can put these in designated
> branches in their repositories. I know this will cause the odd conflict,
> but we (the maintainers) could also periodically sync between each other.
> Another alternative is to create a new repo that all the custodians have
> access to...

This makes things more complicated.....

Best regards,
Stefano


-- 
=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80  Email: office at denx.de
=====================================================================