unofficial mirror of libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@gotplt.org>
To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>, libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Patchwork review workflow: archival rules
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 19:39:32 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5eaaf589-5573-00ca-2caa-777551bc6922@gotplt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5001afa3-4c34-71d6-c70e-3629445da8e7@gotplt.org>

On 30/11/2021 05:47, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On 11/30/21 03:50, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On 11/15/21 23:22, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> What do people think about adding the following to the patch review
>>> workflow[1]?  This should help keep the queue under control.
>>>
>>> ~~~~~~
>>> 3. Maintaining your patch queue
>>>
>>> 3.1 (existing content)
>>>
>>> 3.2. Outdated Patches
>>>
>>> To keep tha backlog in patchwork manageable, outdated patches may be 
>>> archived at regular intervals.
>>>
>>>   * Patches in Changes Requested status will be archived 1 year after 
>>> they have been posted
>>
>>
>> Agreed. And we can decrease the "1 year after" if we find it helps 
>> keep the queue cleaner.
>>>   * Patches older than 3 months that fail to apply to the current 
>>> main branch will be set to Rejected
>>
>> This will be an important step in keeping the queue clean.
>>
>> I agree with this move.
>>
>>>   * Unresolved patches older than 2 years will be archived.
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>>> ~~~~~~
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Siddhesh
>>>
>>> [1] https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Patch%20Review%20Workflow
>>
>> All of this looks good to me.
>>
>> We can change it any time we want IMO, so long as we set expectations and
>> have a public discussion with our reason for making the change.
> 
> Thanks, I'll make the change in the wiki and run some commands over the 
> weekend to implement this.

Sorry I forgot about this; I've updated the wiki now and will run 
updates soon.

Siddhesh

      reply	other threads:[~2022-02-07 14:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-16  4:22 Patchwork review workflow: archival rules Siddhesh Poyarekar
2021-11-16  5:46 ` Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha
2021-11-16  5:53   ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2021-11-16  8:54 ` Paul Zimmermann
2021-11-16  9:02   ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2021-11-29 22:19     ` Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha
2021-11-29 22:20 ` Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha
2021-11-30  0:17   ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-02-07 14:09     ` Siddhesh Poyarekar [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/involved.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5eaaf589-5573-00ca-2caa-777551bc6922@gotplt.org \
    --to=siddhesh@gotplt.org \
    --cc=carlos@redhat.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).