From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id k0ruAKJWDWa+cCEAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 03 Apr 2024 09:16:18 -0400 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=C8uJ9fiP; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id E6D8D1E0C0; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 09:16:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D376D1E030 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 09:16:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F84A3845BC1 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 13:16:15 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3F84A3845BC1 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1712150175; bh=TYAbtIKQex0pKecxFclbJ8/nw6wxb0wEJijsPVMhMxk=; h=References:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=C8uJ9fiPAP1C+GCmlwSKjTIOBExgArthpuY1WisK92OP/ptw/i6GbbpHtj+lwmVWV bFJt2NBisvT61kfRR7pdyfYTKssOYrjDu/mqMTTn6YxHCCTBOHztViGF402a9ABCf6 CKaBQEPsG1IrrpJQH5SrY0VMr5VPqf5iAqNw1rUQ= Received: from mail-ed1-x531.google.com (mail-ed1-x531.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::531]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC6D03847725 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2024 13:12:04 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org AC6D03847725 ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org AC6D03847725 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1712149928; cv=none; b=b/ByBiPnhtC110rHM+MFdpBVw9N86eUgQqmxJrMfXuaDs821CI4xg8pOnHLZzikZBVzcvcsUtM9AFV4kh4xhbnwbjmez3UbMjXzaLitmkvvYVYDYX6sqFjz4kJcwVkaqSCxASCyGXFy4hsJaFZapqldLWLlcQrBfFBQ6hsTHHBM= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1712149928; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TYAbtIKQex0pKecxFclbJ8/nw6wxb0wEJijsPVMhMxk=; h=DKIM-Signature:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject:To; b=qfZelIHu3gARFi4Tf72FnO755GR6vgbsxD6eAlCixEYlOjwsUied3v0tpNClUAoO/1lKuW91M2ONdZBjI+Fm9abCjgGTXmmOSE/JLnqZjOWlbIwDPeA1y3oe5NlUCnM9TqeuwCkOvVv9omTZTb0shrPu+1p8yLGm1oma+oN2Dx4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: by mail-ed1-x531.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-56845954ffeso9430126a12.2 for ; Wed, 03 Apr 2024 06:12:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1712149923; x=1712754723; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=TYAbtIKQex0pKecxFclbJ8/nw6wxb0wEJijsPVMhMxk=; b=Em5t+KYlney4MiGMWMG1pkZTtNe49RYQqrSVleUqmPWYeI7WT8ydC2Aj2wbRlhyUH/ WNAPV5XUCOL90LmBiRkHna8hYC9qoprlYHkNYGX03AOc2brihdZjTvWtbxCGyl/I7put GAPN342DZwv9Rty3MVl2lF+6swKnNMq6DHh04Pxf8M1bZirSwaYVU2mJzvVTO22bP5DA ooliQAdujLwtePiUZuHfna8cUHPhu0TntzH/9Qw0bJVaKoDDxalD9hCN+EWE9XTC5DEl KHWl7oJsn/Q3vclU3NzJ9Ut78RQqHFxmr1h+CHIpE3ezIWdQ6WEG+g8htY2bCiWOYv/2 6TbQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV43tAl0aKwKjxnOtPrHJ1zmbrScKkMcK/tPgZCybT7CMfd8nmR8JlTFxWHVogPJHFJjS57on83wQisEh8p4Ea799g= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyxEQNilFhHX43uLnlY5A5Wm3ytuu1d+9QWQmFfKJr54RGpt0VR w+ADrSEnnOsb6oQQEAMJo90Z7Cj/Ap2B7JtsGFtxvVHPPfCh0Pz/ogcoxqFwAjPJs6y0gJXS1r8 6RQEygWMjqD4pHt0V2s6JuKiooWZOtCGb4Ij6Xw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFK/kd/0XBlXOqWcMikDlI9vfJizCAuy9InNYVCE3cxkjMlzmreBNfuNkSKupnJCO7UCUmeafRKytJiyh/iI9U= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4a48:b0:a4e:4518:4b62 with SMTP id a8-20020a1709064a4800b00a4e45184b62mr7937076ejv.70.1712149922720; Wed, 03 Apr 2024 06:12:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 15:11:55 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Patches submission policy change To: Jan Beulich Cc: Maxim Kuvyrkov , Thiago Bauermann , Adhemerval Zanella , binutils@sourceware.org, GCC Mailing List , gdb@sourceware.org, Nick Clifton , Richard Biener , Jakub Jelinek , Joel Brobecker , "Carlos O'Donell" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Christophe Lyon via Gdb Reply-To: Christophe Lyon Errors-To: gdb-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 at 10:30, Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 03.04.2024 10:22, Christophe Lyon wrote: > > Dear release managers and developers, > > > > TL;DR: For the sake of improving precommit CI coverage and simplifying > > workflows, I=E2=80=99d like to request a patch submission policy change= , so > > that we now include regenerated files. This was discussed during the > > last GNU toolchain office hours meeting [1] (2024-03-28). > > > > Benefits or this change include: > > - Increased compatibility with precommit CI > > - No need to manually edit patches before submitting, thus the =E2=80= =9Cgit > > send-email=E2=80=9D workflow is simplified > > - Patch reviewers can be confident that the committed patch will be > > exactly what they approved > > - Precommit CI can test exactly what has been submitted > > > > Any concerns/objections? > > Yes: Patch size. And no, not sending patches inline is bad practice. Not sure what you mean? Do you mean sending patches as attachments is bad practice? > Even assuming sending patches bi-modal (inline and as attachment) works > (please indicate whether that's the case), it would mean extra work on > the sending side. > For the CI perspective, we use what patchwork is able to detect as patches. Looking at recent patches submissions, it seems patchwork is able to cope with the output of git format-patch/git send-email, as well as attachments. There are cases where patchwork is not able to detect the patch, but I don't know patchwork's exact specifications. Thanks, Christophe > Jan