This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: FYI: Status of gdb usage of gerrit
On 11/28/19 12:54 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2019, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>
>> I want patch authors to update the status of the patches in the patch tracker.
>
> In practice I think we need automation to track what are successive
> versions of the same patch (e.g. Change-Id as used by gerrit) and to mark
> committed patches automatically. The big issue with the previous
> patchwork was accumulation of patches that had in fact been superseded or
> committed but weren't marked as such (as opposed to the accumulation of
> patches that genuinely never got reviewed).
Marking patches as committed when they really are is critical, that will
remove a considerable amount of manual work.
I don't know if patchwork can track successive versions of a patch, that
seems like something that requires a Change-Id-style system to track.
People have been violently opposed to Change-Id in commit messages, and
it doesn't bother me, particularly when it gives you good tracking.
This was recently raised again in upstream kernel:
"Change IDs for kernel patches"
https://lwn.net/Articles/797613/
I expect someone will make this work for the kernel because patch
tracking there is even harder and we'll get to piggy-back on that
solution via git process (I hope).
--
Cheers,
Carlos.