On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 at 19:05, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postg...@jeltef.nl> wrote: > > On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 at 03:21, vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Couple of suggestions: a) No need to show CI status as "Needs rebase," > > "Not processed," etc., for committed patches. > > Do you mean specifically for committed ones? Or just for any patch > with a "closed" status.
It is for any closed status patches. > > b) Can we add a filter > > for "Needs rebase!"? This would help the CommitFest manager easily > > list patches that need updating. > > That should be pretty easy to implement. But is that really what we > want? In the next release, sorting by "failing since" is implemented. > It sounds like that could be enough instead. i.e. do we really only > want to call out patches that need a rebase? Or also ones that have > been failing in CI for a long time? > > I'm even wondering if this whole flow still makes sense. Do we really > want to send an email to the mailing list about this? And if so, why > is someone doing that manually? If people subscribe to updates for > patches that they authored, then they get these "needs rebase" > automatically. Should we maybe simply default that option to true? And > for instance send a notification automatically to all people with a > "needs rebase" CI status whenever we start a new commitfest. It will be good if you can send a notification automatically to the patch requiring a rebase when the CFBot first identifies this(not only during the start of commitfest) and probably send this notification once in a day for 3 or so days and then change the status to "waiting on author" if a new rebased version is not posted in this time. Regards, Vignesh
