improvement to patchwatcher

Darragh Bailey felix at compsoc.nuigalway.ie
Thu Aug 28 07:32:27 CDT 2008


On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 08:44:05AM -0700, Dan Kegel wrote:
> It would be hard to recognize later versions of the same patch,
> even with the '(try 2)' convention, since they often get split
> and munged while being beaten into submission.
> So Patchwatcher would have to have a way for developers to
> manually mark old patchsets as obsolete.
> 
> Most developers probably wouldn't bother unless this was
> really, really easy.   I can't imagine that happening unless,
> say, we start requiring patches to be submitted via a secure
> web interface that verifies that the author has signed the Wine
> Contributors Agreement etc.  At which point it wouldn't be
> too hard to coax developers into clicking a box saying
> "obsoletes this old patchset".  But that'd be a pretty big change in
> wine's workflow.
> - Dan

If it could handle working with GPG signatures, would that be a viable 
way to determine if the new patch is from the same author? I'm sure 
that most people could setup their mail clients to automatically sign 
their emails.

With that supported patchwatcher could limit the ability to obsolete
patches to the originating author for the general case. And a special
case of allowing people with certain trusted GPG signatures to obsolete
patches.

When I say obsoleting patches, I'm thinking of the supporting commands
embedded into the email:
i.e. "!PatchWatcher patch mark obsolete <hash/id/etc>"

-- 
Darragh

"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool."



More information about the wine-devel mailing list