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

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 07/24/2018 10:34 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> 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.

Well it's never been our habit to review patch series sent against
random private branches.  (x86-next not being a random private branch.)
The idea would be that you put a tag in the message somewhere that
indicates what the patchbot should do.  This would probably be just the
message-id of the patch series, given that (steady state) your previous
series would have had the bot reply to it with a link.  Something like this:

Prerequisite-series: <5B506A6E02000078001D5D17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

If the sender doesn't add the prerequisite series, then of course it
won't apply; but the reviewer can choose to ignore the failure in that case.

 -George

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