On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:42:25AM +0200, Harald Welte wrote:
I would thus be in favor of having the following on
the main mailing
list:
> new_changes Somebody created a new change
> new_patchsets Somebody updated/added a patch(set) to a change
and not have those:
> > all_comments Somebody but jenkins commented
> > submitted_changes Somebody has pushed the submit button and it is in
> > abandoned_changes Somebody gave up on the change
Maybe we can have a verbose mailing list with all notifications, and only the
sparse new_* notifications copied to the main mailing list? :/
I see a conflict though: when we go on to use the gerrit inline commenting
infrastructure, and others comment on patches on the main ML, we have comments
in several "places" with possible parallel conversations and mixups. So IMHO
unless we copy the gerrit commenting to the ML, we should actually completely
drop gerrit commenting and only use email for that.
I would like to read comments without having to navigate the gerrit system --
whatever that means in terms of what we use. gerrit has features that
patchwork doesn't, but I don't exactly burst out in cheers about it ;)
What actually is the workflow for Jane Doe sending a [PATCH] email to e.g.
openbsc@? Do we ask Ms. Doe to create a gerrit account and re-submit? Does a
core dev have to proxy it to gerrit for her?
Re Holger, about the +0 -0 feature in the subjects: completely not important, a
constant string indicating a comment and/or vote nature would be plenty.
~Neels