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 123581F4B4 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 19:50:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243897AbhDPTuf (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:50:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:58343 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235045AbhDPTua (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:50:30 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D44CBC893F; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:50:04 -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=T+gprRYOhh+ZG6zldlBufg8Txvw=; b=vPi4hj 7zZfXqTwqBdL5hfxjC5cZOSjC6cvTvEg0fnFTu/qboRIsP/d8VE+nJE+Y2YfOlm3 ssVhkv9IX1z17q9l59GFmsU/vZiPBl1/pgF/zRd9dF9pFEdNA+gYChuCzCw/ers/ CZG4oDdt/qCEMGgh3cdRkZv/qdk0QWa5ZveZM= 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=uSXqcrEWH9vqhxZrC3TY6OlIL2BhG3Sq zoIj7yaekLhyUNvb8mZktTZJrhM1jKehYI1Lp5rxrNkCZItGTEIttC1De+cDZa0v xsYzjhJkNsvvD8aYKHHkVZM1Wq295oyV3JzjxEDTbGdYF6xlWL6ocENmXiKScKsJ BXNuiXZLfCY= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8604C893C; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:50:04 -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 10CEBC893B; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:50:04 -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 12:50:03 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Jonathan Nieder's message of "Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:13:26 -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: EFFFF452-9EEC-11EB-A701-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Nieder writes: > 3. Do you think patchwork goes in a direction that is likely to help > with these? 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: 1. Visit the message at lore.kernel.org/git/ [*1*] 2. Notice that it is a response to a message, and click the link to be taken to [*2*] 3. Notice that nobody commented on the patch. 4. Type "f:zhening ref-filter" to the search box and search, with suspicion that this was an updated version of something. 5. Click one of them in the result [*3*] 6. This time, we can tell that this seemed to have had two earlier iterations, and after reading the discussion through, the last one changed the course in a major way. Not just a new helper introduced in the earlier rounds has gone away, but an existing helper got removed. 7. All comments in the discussion for the earlier two rounds can be read as supporting the new direction the latest round takes. 8. The fact remains that even if the direction has been endorsed (see 7. above) nobody took a look at the implementation for the latest round. 9. Make the final verdict. I use my newsreader to do pretty much the equivalent of the above without hitting https://lore.kernel.org/git/ but the above is written to use the web interface, in order to make it reproducible more easily by anybody on the list. Now, how can patchwork improve the above reviewer experience, out of the box and possibly with new helpe rools around it? I can see #3 would immediately become obvious, and I hope #4-#5 would become unnecessary. Anything else? At steps #6 and #7, there is human judgment involved that may not be automatable, but would there be some mechanism to make it easy to help these steps if the user visits patchwork (instead of staying in my newsreader or web interface to the lore archive)? I am of course not expecting to automate step #9 ;-) It would be nice though. Thanks. [References] *1* https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAOLTT8Tis5Yjg8UR0c-i0BnqiFQvLXvDgxUQJ-WcP6jjQPu9cQ@mail.gmail.com/ *2* https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.928.git.1617975348494.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/ *3* https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.927.v2.git.1617809209164.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/