On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 01:30:44PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote: > If the patch is automatedly filed against bugzilla, people will > assume viewing that patch tells them all they need to know. > > But the reality is somebody may rebase/amend/repush to the > publicised branch location before any developer reviews the patch in > bugzilla, and so by the time somebody reviews the patch, it is > already wrong.
This is what I was trying to get at [1]. And I still think some sort of rate-limited posting of updated patches is the best way to handle it. Git remotes are more complete (signatures and committer info) and as current as you like while you're actively reviewing [2], and I expect the point of the attached patch is to provide an archival reference that folks can refer to after GitHub (or whoever's hosting the remote) closes down. In that case, having the attached patch occasionally lag by a week (or whatever) is not going to be a big deal. Cheers, Trevor [1]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/97329/focus=97333 Message-ID: <20150912213111.gb14...@odin.tremily.us> [2]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/97329/focus=97333 Message-ID: <20150912210734.ga14...@odin.tremily.us> -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
