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 227BC1F953 for ; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 19:05:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1376361AbhLBTIi (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Dec 2021 14:08:38 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:54328 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1348377AbhLBTIh (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Dec 2021 14:08:37 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB31E15FE52; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 14:05:14 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=4ymYTNqsICCf3Q+/IPdBP4NsYwVgIj8NWDzTp4 GG4xw=; b=GB7tFVRZdtCBw8nFC8RIh+AQ7JQ8OWso1ojIyxNraUjRlWtRQ7vEGs BR3q0DLE+DYYqRYs97QuTOfNDWKHx/d/tergR7cdK2b4QM4175Vq52tJl3bJea2B M/hhzkN+BgGW126ME4uJEgFAq+i7SVU2+X6YiYWgmze+DwdXjkfso= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D377715FE51; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 14:05:14 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.133.2.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8B64715FE50; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 14:05:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Matthias =?utf-8?Q?A=C3=9Fhauer?= , Mahdi Hosseinzadeh via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Mahdi Hosseinzadeh Subject: Re: [PATCH] githubci: add a workflow for creating GitHub release notes References: <211129.86k0grf7lj.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 11:05:08 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 30 Nov 2021 12:46:02 +0100 (CET)") 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: C58E1BA2-53A2-11EC-9D96-F327CE9DA9D6-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: >> Rather than hardcode given repositories, which e.g. for testing the CI >> itself can be bothersome, perhaps a better thing is to put this into the >> existing ci-config? I.e. git/git.git could opt itself in to behavior >> that would be off by default? > > You probably missed that the purpose of this workflow is something that > does not make sense in the forks of git.git. > > Its purpose is to create releases for all tags that are pushed to the > repository. Most forks of git.git have no business creating releases, and > those that do already have their own processes in place. > > As such, the situation is very different from the CI/PR runs that some > contributors might want to restrict to only certain branches in their > forks. All true. But https://github.com/git/git/ itself has no business creating releases, as we already have the release process that pushes the release material to kernel.org to be distributed from there. So... do we still need to discuss this patch? In other words, what's the benefit of creating "releases for all tags that are pushed to the repository" there? Does it give us redundancy in case kernel.org goes down? Does it risk confusing users having to wonder release materials from which source is more "genuine"?