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: AS17314 8.43.84.0/22 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 710931F953 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 08:54:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F124385AC19 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 08:54:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7E3D3858430 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 08:54:11 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org B7E3D3858430 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=inria.fr Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=inria.fr DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=inria.fr; s=dc; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:subject: references; bh=PqIXN3p+zDUd0MAYskvbdLjv91VuAvATfOxhz1ZfglM=; b=UNsEcSQyJY/qu3g9KV7I0EptZTKqGJzIT3z6N2Ct71EDg+dWl4Z/3ZMB sBvWShedjof3cBvKOcYI3FrjEoQ6f9z0/03Cb68Lb6Wuiti22So7vyGjS ZgOJKw48kJVFJD7ajuSRO1hURQGcJZKUrkWVEhGIGt2SneWl+5/GUbRGu o=; IronPort-Data: =?us-ascii?q?A9a23=3AjLYqJ67EPNHB6Vn2qsgZ0gxRtBPFchMFZxGqfqr?= =?us-ascii?q?LsXjdYENSgj0PmmpNWmyGb/iNMWvxKYpyOoTg90tUucPVmoM3SQY5pCpnJ55og?= =?us-ascii?q?ZqcVI7Bdi8cHAvLc5adFBo/hykmh2ipwPkcFhcwnT/wdOi+xZVA/fvQHOOlUbe?= =?us-ascii?q?aYnkZqTJME0/NtzoywobVvaY42bBVMyvV0T/Di5W31G2Ng1aYAUpIg063ky6Di?= =?us-ascii?q?dyp0N8uUvPSUtgQ1LPWvyF94JvyvshdJVOgKmVfNrbSq+ouUNiEEm3lExcFUrt?= =?us-ascii?q?Jk57ndUgDXrO60Qqm0ycMHfj7xEEa4HFruko4HKN0hUN/szyUm5ZDydBIuIa1Q?= =?us-ascii?q?AEvFqzKguUUFRdCe817FfYWoeSWfifXXcu7iheun2HX6/FvBkpzNIkA+u9fGmZ?= =?us-ascii?q?T7/cVNzkXY1aEne3e6Km6RuVsi98jBMbsIJsbpjdn1z6xMBqMafgvWI3W4tpRw?= =?us-ascii?q?Dp2gsdUHP+YadBxVNamVzyYCzUnB7vdIMtWcD+Uu0TC?= IronPort-HdrOrdr: =?us-ascii?q?A9a23=3Aei8TDai0/0cWfoygg6eiS7/rDXBQXuwji2hC?= =?us-ascii?q?6mlwRA09TyX4raqTdZsgpHnJYVoqOE3I2urgBED4ewK6yXcX2/hpAV7BZniChI?= =?us-ascii?q?LAFugLhrcKqAeQeREWmNQttpuJ5MJFZeEYdWIK6foTAGGDfeoI8Z2i6rCzwc/G?= =?us-ascii?q?zx5WIT2D4ctbgDtENg=3D=3D?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.87,238,1631570400"; d="scan'208";a="3813977" Received: from tomate.loria.fr (HELO tomate) ([152.81.10.51]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Nov 2021 09:54:11 +0100 Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 09:54:10 +0100 Message-Id: From: Paul Zimmermann To: Siddhesh Poyarekar In-Reply-To: <5db890b1-f23c-22cc-407e-bf172dd24590@gotplt.org> (message from Siddhesh Poyarekar on Tue, 16 Nov 2021 09:52:58 +0530) Subject: Re: Patchwork review workflow: archival rules References: <5db890b1-f23c-22cc-407e-bf172dd24590@gotplt.org> X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces+e=80x24.org@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" Dear Siddhesh, this sounds good to me. By the way, do we have an automatic mean to archive patches that are obsolete because a new version has been posted? Paul > Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 09:52:58 +0530 > From: Siddhesh Poyarekar > > 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 > > * Patches older than 3 months that fail to apply to the current main > branch will be set to Rejected > > * Unresolved patches older than 2 years will be archived. > ~~~~~~ > > Thanks, > Siddhesh > > [1] https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Patch%20Review%20Workflow >