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 :-)

--
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Reply via email to