[PATCH v2 01/30] patman: Move all non-test logic into control module

[Tom Rini]

On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 03:39:35PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> On Sat, 24 May 2025 at 15:35, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > On Sat, 24 May 2025 at 15:31, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 03:22:57PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > Hi Tom,
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 24 May 2025 at 15:18, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 05:23:48AM +0100, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Tom,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, 23 May 2025 at 22:25, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 09:20:37PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi Tom,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, 23 May 2025 at 17:47, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 05:32:36PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi Tom,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 23 May 2025 at 15:04, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 08:19:30AM -0500, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > It is easier for tests if the top-level control logic is all in one
> > > > > > > > > > > > module. Create a new do_patman() function to handle this. Move the
> > > > > > > > > > > > existing code into it.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > (no changes since v1)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >  tools/patman/__main__.py | 49 ++----------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > >  tools/patman/control.py  | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > > > > > > > > > >  2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Applied to sjg/master, thanks!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Odd. I thought you had posted this against master or next, intending it
> > > > > > > > > > > for mainline, which is why I assigned it to you in patchwork. I see the
> > > > > > > > > > > cover letter is missing what commit it's against. And instead here you
> > > > > > > > > > > are once again spamming the list and with messages about your personal
> > > > > > > > > > > tree. Why?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm applying it to my tree and intend to send you a PR at some point,
> > > > > > > > > > with collected tools/ patches. So I believe I need to send emails
> > > > > > > > > > about applying things and update it in patchwork. Let's discuss this
> > > > > > > > > > in a future call.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I don't see what there is to discuss. Please follow the normal process
> > > > > > > > > for mainline and stop spamming the list with notices for your personal
> > > > > > > > > tree. You're also diverging your own tree further from mainline by doing
> > > > > > > > > this and making it less likely (multiple people have told you they don't
> > > > > > > > > want to review things not against mainline) any follow-up work will get
> > > > > > > > > comments other than that it's not applicable to mainline.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For patman, I have another series [1] I'm planning to apply to my tree tomorrow
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Would you like me to send 'applied' emails for it to the mailing list?
> > > > > > > > Or perhaps just for the cover letter? Would you like me to send you a
> > > > > > > > pull request?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > Simon
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=456256
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes, that's another series that while I disagree with the direction
> > > > > > > you're taking things, would rather apply to mainline than let it bitrot
> > > > > > > in mainline. So please send a PR against next. And that would also apply
> > > > > > > to the series this email is in reply to. As again, I had expected it for
> > > > > > > mainline and not your downstream tree even if I think we (and our users)
> > > > > > > would all benefit from managing the python portions differently.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK, once I have applied the remaining two series I will send a PR.
> > > > >
> > > > > Based on the emails in my inbox this morning, you're doing the opposite
> > > > > of what I asked for. But maybe this afternoon will bring something
> > > > > different.
> > > > >
> > > > > > You didn't express a preference for the 'applied' emails. It seems
> > > > > > better to send these emails so that there is a record of the patch
> > > > > > being applied.
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess I wasn't clear enough. Stop spamming the list with *anything*
> > > > > about your personal tree. And if you're going to send anything about
> > > > > something that's intended for mainline, you should make patman act more
> > > > > like b4 and NOT send a message to every patch. I know I used to, but the
> > > > > workflow b4 enables is much better for everyone.
> > > >
> > > > How do I (or anyone else) know whether a patch was applied? If you
> > > > only reply to the cover letter, doesn't that mean that the patches are
> > > > left 'hanging' in the mailing list?
> > > >
> > > > I didn't know you had changed your policy on this...it certainly seems
> > > > odd to me. I often find Heinrich's patches are 'silently' applied, so
> > > > perhaps he does the same thing?
> > >
> > > Every custodian does things as they see fit for mainline, but most are
> > > adopting b4 which means that no, I'm not sure why there would be
> > > confusion, or where it would come from. The emails say what the commit
> > > ranges are for a series, patchwork is updated and then periodically most
> > > patches in patchwork then get their githash added. Replying to the cover
> > > letter with the commit range for the series means it's very much not
> > > "hanging".
> >
> > Generally I rely on seeing a reply to a patch to know it was applied.
> > So it is confusing when the patch goes in but there was no reply to
> > the patch.
> >
> > I've noticed that you seem less inclined to apply some patches from a
> > series, instead requesting that the whole series is resent. Perhaps
> > that is why?
> 
> Also, was there an announcement about this change? If so, could you
> please point me to it?

I don't see why there would be an announcement? Now, again, please stop
posting things to the public mailing list about your tree. I'm not the
only person who has told you it's not helpful.

I mean heck, a big part of the problem is that you keep replying to
patches you posted for your tree and spamming the rest of the community
about it. I can't tell if you're acting in bad faith or not anymore.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20250524/07a40f2f/attachment.sig>