Re: [Xen-devel] automation: Creating a patchwork instance to improve pre-commit build testing

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 24.07.18 at 11:24, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 03:06:08AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 23.07.18 at 18:40, <lars.kurth@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > # How does this impact me?
>> > The contribution workflow is *not* impacted by this change, but once up 
>> > and 
> 
>> > running the following will happen once you post a patch or patch series to 
>> > xen-devel:
>> > * Patchwork will take patch series from the mailing list and applies it
>> > * CI/DC testing is triggered
>> > * A test report will be sent as a mail to the patch or the series (aka the 
>> > 00 patch of the series)
>> > 
>> > This does mean though that series which do not build or show other issues, 
>> > will likely not be reviewed until the tests pass. This would lessen the 
>> > burden on reviewers, as they will know whether the code submitted builds 
>> > on a 
>> > wide array of environments. 
>> 
>> So how are dependencies between series intended to be dealt with? It
>> is not uncommon for someone to say "applies only on top of xyz". The
>> implication of "will likely not be reviewed until the tests pass" seems
>> unsuitable to me in such a case.
>> 
> 
> We have been asking everyone to rebase to staging before posting a new
> version for a long time.  It is natural for the bot to assume that
> everything should apply on top of staging. That would provide most value
> to the community.
> 
> For special cases like you just mention, we should aim to provide
> mechanisms to manually appoint a branch to be tested.

I'm afraid I disagree again: Tools used should not be dictated. I'm
using quilt, not git for my work, and hence I don't maintain any
branches anywhere.

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel