From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B8E243DFA; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:50:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77CEB40268; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:50:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-oo1-f50.google.com (mail-oo1-f50.google.com [209.85.161.50]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FC44025D for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:50:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-oo1-f50.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5a4a14c52fcso556885eaf.1 for ; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 06:50:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1712238612; x=1712843412; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=KfaDtsjsbRWx5a/44llQhBk7vDUXrGs+LQbdi/JBbFc=; b=fx61i2fsyGJOFLLCgtYiLXh42UKe8PVOcXvJrETVxzB0tC/8PXz02W0i0lBMyB8lhC u9ePERB+kfu+0HKI3P5qKz3kJDXHy9KUnwhvNj1ssKJmma9hrz4tPfIGu60At0VnKott dsrCEdaSBK16pQZRFukOdvYTHzd8mdS6xaMJg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1712238612; x=1712843412; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=KfaDtsjsbRWx5a/44llQhBk7vDUXrGs+LQbdi/JBbFc=; b=I4df3otybCa4eMiJyNbjNsKgBEGu+ZyFss5Jh8auh2LwZwWU3rZ4dbET2yrAGwbAiC 37E7BzJp3hfRpa9eJgTH+RtUiXISl9M5CWWEjqaE9ACc9ZrqmzRdjHERUmd85KPsQfEA 9Xwf3v51VSBK/PA8ilfft8HoJlZ95j6NGLAoZHrD9ePAQiVXmNTiNhsguit0xrXUsVRG kSWKnD0ccfcaB9B9RqsFwtIJI5bRBhELbxWAgzk8GUCPFoZFe7VdwY7nLovoJ+ewYkbm A1iRSVYrUQwxFUDRe2TYu0rxcu5zwTifYjaDr0E0we5tH/jsLsZbYp1X76VmrDszOAn2 +EEA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwyH7k/Otev6d0JD7R2NL2+TXzkPGjQGFkD6OtcGz+bRcKwmOmH SCl6dL2K54hgvkIjybqeS6Si504pRdyAredSgTJxxnapsUauloQMP/FzoeEPIXhtWN5Xl90gVp9 d8hJZo3KEZD6mJML/qek8E/OMdZuJmNAWa/ZEK5/bg2xaOjgb X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEm9uGoiSu1uRjCKAF4oZGGjKcxUmMurTRetu829LkTxBhhACGC4ZnG94Osa1xMGpGL34U6vFZtg4oY/hsJ0Zo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6820:2713:b0:5a7:c78c:cd67 with SMTP id db19-20020a056820271300b005a7c78ccd67mr2457819oob.5.1712238612032; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 06:50:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Patrick Robb Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 09:50:01 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Adding Series Dependency to Patchwork To: ci@dpdk.org, "NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL)" Cc: Adam Hassick , David Marchand , Aaron Conole Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org Hi Thomas, Adam explains more completely in the preceding email, but he has talked with the patchwork project maintainer, and determined the needed next steps to do work adding depends-on support to patchwork server. And he provides an estimate (35-50 hours of his time) for adding this feature to pw. What we want is a community opinion on using Community Lab resources (our developer time) towards this effort on patchwork project. I'm going to you, because you were the person who originally raised the depends on issue and adding this support to pw server. Given his time estimate, do you endorse this work, or do you prefer we focus on our SOW items and other community requests which are in queue right now? Thanks. On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 2:51=E2=80=AFPM Adam Hassick = wrote: > > Hi All, > > There has been a discussion on GitHub between myself and others about > adding support for series dependency to Patchwork. This would involve > adding the feature to the Patchwork dashboard and git-pw. However, it > seems like the maintainer would like us to do much of the required > implementation work. I estimate, with a low level of certainty, that > it would consume 35 to 50 hours of developer time. > > The active issue relating to this feature can be found here, as well > as the archived one: > https://github.com/getpatchwork/patchwork/issues/583 > > Would it be worth it for us here at the Community Lab to contribute > upstream to Patchwork? Implementing the feature in the Patchwork > project will make our method for defining series dependencies the > standard, and it may lift some of the burden of maintaining this > feature off of us. > > Regards, > Adam Hassick