[OE-core] Patchwork not picking changes from the ML

[Patrick Ohly]

On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 15:33 +0100, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On 2017-02-24 15:21, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-02-22 at 15:56 -0600, Jose Lamego wrote:
> >>
> >> On 02/22/2017 02:55 PM, Michael Halstead wrote:
> >>> I've seen several issues with hooks. I was working on them yesterday and
> >>> will continue today.
> >>>
> >>> These are currently managed by hand but we are moving them into
> >>> configuration management which should help keep them working consistently.
> >>
> >> Michael: one syntax error in patchwork code was pulled into production
> >> yesterday. This is the cause for missing patches. The error is fixed in
> >> the Yocto repo now, please perform a server code update ASAP.
> >>
> >> Martin: I will look at the UI issue you are describing and file a bug if
> >> needed.
> >
> > Would it perhaps make sense to reply to the original author with an
> > email confirming that his patch is now in Patchwork? It should include a
> > link to the patch series, too.
> >
> > This could have several advantages:
> >       * submitters not aware of Patchwork or whether their target
> >         currently uses it learn about it and then can follow the
> >         progress of their patch
> >       * everyone gets a confirmation that the submission made it through
> >         the various mail servers and Patchwork itself
> >
> > It still relies on the original submitter to watch out for breakages in
> > the processes, but I guess that can't be avoided with an asynchronous,
> > mail-based process.
> >
> 
> I would love to see this added to the process - +1 :-)

Let me clarify that my original proposal was to reply only to the
original author. That was meant to keep noise down on the list. However,
perhaps it should also go to the list?

Then others can help check that Patchwork works, as the original author
might not be aware that a response is missing. It also tells everyone
the relevant link in Patchwork.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.