From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31538 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2006 07:10:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 31529 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Mar 2006 07:10:53 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from 203.197.88.2.ILL-PUNE.static.vsnl.net.in (HELO marvin.codito.net) (203.197.88.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:10:52 +0000 Received: from ramanal.codito.co.in ([220.225.32.98]) (authenticated bits=0) by marvin.codito.net (8.13.5/8.13.5/Debian-3) with ESMTP id k2U6pGPE026958 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:21:22 +0530 Subject: Re: Using a patch queue? From: Ramana Radhakrishnan Reply-To: ramana.radhakrishnan@codito.com To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20060330001459.GA13813@nevyn.them.org> References: <20060330001459.GA13813@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 10:03:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1143701327.7624.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00218.txt.bz2 I think its a good idea as it might enable more people to help track patches down . Folks tend to try and look at patches but this should help to not allow stuff to slip through the cracks. cheers Ramana On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 19:14 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > Daniel Berlin offered in February to set up a patch queue. It's some > custom software that he wrote for GCC, after two consecutive GCC Summits > in which people agreed that they wanted some automated way to keep track of > patches, but no one came up with anything that seemed usable. > > Here's the GCC one: > http://www.dberlin.org/patches/ > http://dberlin.org/patchdirections.html > > I've never used it except to play with it, but a lot of GCC contributors do, > as you can see. I think that's a pretty compelling point in its favor, > since they have a similar workflow to ours. > > The patch tracker follows the list (via the web archives, I think) and > collects annotated messages. You're under no obligation to annotate your > messages; anyone can manually add a URL to the patch tracker via the web > interface. I believe the first review response removes the patch from the > queue; we might want to save :REVIEWMAIL: for final approval/rejection. > Or it might be useful enough just to track patches which have never > been looked at, which happens quite a lot. > > I wouldn't mind having a better tool than my inbox to track down what needs > looking at; I don't have enough time to review everything that needs > reviewing as it is. Anyone else have an opinion? >