Bug 72160 - Add pulseaudio to patchwork
Summary: Add pulseaudio to patchwork
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: freedesktop.org
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Patchwork (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other All
: medium normal
Assignee: Damien Lespiau
QA Contact: fd.o Admin Massive
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-11-29 17:05 UTC by poljar
Modified: 2015-11-10 11:49 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:
i915 platform:
i915 features:


Attachments

Description poljar 2013-11-29 17:05:16 UTC
Please add the pulseaudio development mailing list to patchwork.

List address: pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org

Thanks.
Comment 1 Peter Meerwald 2014-01-13 20:33:39 UTC
ping? what's going on?
Comment 2 Denis Kasak 2014-06-25 18:34:11 UTC
Ping. It's been over half a year now, can this get some attention?
Comment 3 Daniel Stone 2015-09-18 10:27:32 UTC
do you still need this, or are you moving to phabricator? if you do, i can take a look quickly.
Comment 4 Tanu Kaskinen 2015-09-18 16:21:52 UTC
Thanks Daniel! Moving to Phabricator has not been discussed, so no, there are currently no plans to move to Phabricator. The decision to try Patchwork is old, but I don't think there has been any changes that would require new discussion, so please add PulseAudio to Patchwork.

(Added some more people to CC.)
Comment 5 Arun Raghavan 2015-09-18 16:28:23 UTC
BTW, is it possible to migrate all our bugzilla history to Phabricator? If that's possible, I'd like for the other devs to try it out and consider moving.
Comment 6 Tanu Kaskinen 2015-09-18 17:14:22 UTC
I suppose using both Patchwork and Phabricator doesn't make sense, so Daniel, please don't enable Patchwork before the situation becomes clearer.

David, Peter, what do you think about trying Phabricator for tracking patches instead of Patchwork? Using it as a patch tracker implies using it for doing reviews too. My main concern is whether Phabricator will force all patches to go through it; that would cause too much hassle just to evaluate the thing. But I think it doesn't force that, so we can also keep accepting patches on the mailing list while evaluating.
Comment 7 David Henningsson 2015-09-18 18:07:28 UTC
I haven't used either Patchwork nor Phabricator, but if either is an all-or-nothing deal (i e, you can no longer use your old/current patch review workflow) I would count that as a big minus for that method.
Comment 8 Tanu Kaskinen 2015-09-19 04:18:11 UTC
Patchwork just monitors the mailing list, collects patch discussions and allows maintainers to set the status of collected patches (accepted/rejected/whatever). Patchwork is not a review tool, and doesn't touch the git repo. It only collects patch discussions from the mailing list.

Sjoerd Simons confirmed that Phabricator doesn't want to own the git repo, and doesn't necessarily even need write access to it to be still useful.
Comment 9 Daniel Stone 2015-09-21 08:34:41 UTC
Indeed, neither are either/or. Patchwork does two things: adds new patches when it sees them in list posts, and marks revisions as closed when they're committed to the Git repository.

Phabricator mirrors the Git repository, allowing you to review patches which have been submitted using the 'arc' CLI tool, and marking those revisions as closed when they land in the repository.

So I'd say the only minus against both is confusion or getting reviews split between the two systems.
Comment 10 Daniel Stone 2015-09-21 09:10:15 UTC
(and re Bugzilla, yes, we can do an import; it just needs a little bit more tweaking, including to update the bug to refer to the new Phabricator URI)
Comment 11 Daniel Stone 2015-09-22 17:58:34 UTC
Added to Patchwork:
http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/pulseaudio/list/

If you give me a list of names to add to the maintainer field for PA, I can do that. Also happy to help if you want to get going with evaluating Phabricator.
Comment 12 Arun Raghavan 2015-09-22 18:14:24 UTC
Thanks Daniel! The maintainers on patchwork would be:

arun@accosted.net
tanuk@iki.fi
david.henningsson@canonical.com

That said, I guess we've got the Phabricator setup going for now, and it's a matter of starting to use it for reviews (unless I've missed some steps?), so it might make more sense for us to start with that instead.
Comment 13 Tanu Kaskinen 2015-09-22 18:49:35 UTC
> That said, I guess we've got the Phabricator setup going for now, and it's a
> matter of starting to use it for reviews (unless I've missed some steps?),
> so it might make more sense for us to start with that instead.

Do you mean start with Phabricator instead of Patchwork? I guess we already kind of started with Patchwork, since it doesn't really involve any workflow changes. Patchwork just sits there and tells you what patches are pending review, if you bother opening the tool :)

We can very well simultaneously start experimenting with Phabricator for the actual reviewing work. So you say the setup is already working, and I can start sending patches there with arc? To be clear, I don't think we should advertise Phabricator much yet. First try it with a few patches.
Comment 14 Arun Raghavan 2015-09-23 06:08:50 UTC
Sounds good, let's try both and discuss in a couple of weeks.
Comment 15 Arun Raghavan 2015-09-23 06:25:41 UTC
Sounds good, let's try both and discuss in a couple of weeks.
Comment 16 Tanu Kaskinen 2015-09-24 20:47:09 UTC
It looks like Patchwork isn't picking up patches. A couple of patches were sent to the mailing list yesterday, but Patchwork is empty. patchwork@annarchy.freedesktop.org shows up in the subscriber list, so that's not the problem...
Comment 17 Tanu Kaskinen 2015-09-25 13:57:53 UTC
pq mentioned at #freedesktop that annarchy ran out of space on Wednesday. Maybe that's why the patches weren't picked up? Let's see what happens with future patches...
Comment 18 Damien Lespiau 2015-10-16 13:46:18 UTC
Ah! I didn't see that one because the component wasn't Patchwork. Sorry about that.
Comment 19 Damien Lespiau 2015-11-10 11:49:24 UTC
Ok, the addition should be complete, closing.


Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.