From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEEB11F4B4 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 20:25:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245205AbhDPU0F (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 16:26:05 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:62412 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S244908AbhDPU0E (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 16:26:04 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69DA5C8C93; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 16:25:39 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=CGYZe4Qcc0/DmszrmM6Jel//I4c=; b=viTLFS GFOA3HP4LUVBaAbS2Ph9ZynlbQjFVV5t2QWET5X/UGgurVgkB5JZjp0XxGQ8GYQR rRJ4ZZ1l4FHcmUeokDJVdyhRYMsVx0gDg20TZJzksfcjbUL0Ic7FD70nwZQULeRr 6SDpTrOEPXmHtKxrlqNglQaTH23ksAdVsnq2w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=VfuDToyRTZswnWZGcygK+JFZPO547XGV gW/ZJpv0UpyukbrtnJCpusgdQNuzvxr5+ydPuQMYU1tLB/xMxXnjaDlFCJx8x8Ul RlXdsW0pNiVAG4NoQIGo5sDrlH+8Q1Lv2ZffM3qtuAjc8U422r3swQOAylR3MO7S Uke6+UVaWE0= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60819C8C91; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 16:25:39 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C170AC8C90; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 16:25:38 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Nieder Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Raxel Gutierrez , mricon@kernel.org, patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org, Taylor Blau , Emily Shaffer , ZheNing Hu Subject: Re: Pain points in Git's patch flow References: Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 13:25:38 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Fri, 16 Apr 2021 12:50:03 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E864351E-9EF1-11EB-BB8A-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > So here is a real-life example. > > Let's say somebody is looking at a "gentle ping" [*1*] > > znh> The patch seems to have fallen into the crack. > zhn> Jeff and Junio, willing to help? > > How would we figure out what happened to the patch today without > visiting patchwork would be: > ... > Now, how can patchwork improve the above reviewer experience, out > of the box and possibly with new helpe rools around it? Also, it would be ideal if it is made easy for willing reviewers with excess bandwidth to preemptively find and review patches that need reviewing. I think your original write-up upthread covered this use case sufficiently. Thanks.