Re: [PATCH 1/4] gdb: make discrete_position return optional

["Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>]

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, Simon Marchi wrote:

> >  FWIW at <https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gdb/> we have a working 
> > instance of patchwork too that can be used to track own and other people's 
> > submissions, which also has been recently brought up to date as far as the 
> > engine is concerned, thanks to people using it actively for the glibc 
> > project.  They've even set up a weekly meeting recently to review patches:
> > <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/PatchworkReviewMeetings>.  That might 
> > be something to consider I believe for patch management.
> 
> Yes, I think we should use it!
> 
> But our previous experience with Patchwork is that it's a lot of work to
> manage patches to keep Patchwork in a good state.  When you send a v2, v3,
> v4 of a series, it creates new patches, and someone needs to manually go
> set the older ones as "Superseded".  And when then patches get merged,
> someone needs to go mark them as "Merged" so they go away.
> 
> Is this how it still works?
> 
> If Patchwork could do that somewhat automatically and reliably (say, by
> relying on same the Change-Ids as Gerrit uses), I think it would be
> wonderful.

 This is a known issue glibc people have been actively working on:

<https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2020-December/120473.html>

and given that we share the instance of patchwork once it has been done it 
will either work automatically for us too, or it should be easy to adapt.  
Also I guess someone from our side might as well step in and participate 
in the effort.

  Maciej