Re: Adding Series Dependency to Patchwork

[Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>]

On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 11:31 AM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/22/2024 5:28 PM, Patrick Robb wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 12:15 PM Adam Hassick <ahassick@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> If we go with the URL option, does is still required to differentiate as
> >>> "patch-xxx" or "series-yyy", previously they were different IDs, but
> >>> with URL can patchwork deduce if it is series or patch? If so this can
> >>> bring a simplification.
> >>
> >> No, you can just paste the URL and the Django URL resolver will figure
> >> out whether it points at a patch or a series. No need to differentiate
> >> with the URLs.
> >>
> >> That's also true of the message ID option too. There isn't much of a
> >> point in differentiating patch/series message IDs because series do
> >> not reliably have an email associated with them.
> >
> > Sounds good. I want to highlight again for the ci group that all
> > dependencies will be series dependencies, regardless of whether
> > "patch-xxx" or "series-yyy" is used. If a patch message id or url is
> > submitted, it will be mapped to its series url for the dependency.
> >
>
> Are you planning to keep the 'patch' or 'series' part, why not change
> the syntax as:
>
> Depends-on: <message-ID>
> or
> Depends-on: <patchwork URL>
>

Good point. Yes, there is no reason to keep the "patch" or "series"
prefix to the value.

>
> And is there a benefit to support both "message-ID" and "patchwork URL",
> so why not just:
> Depends-on: <patchwork URL>
>

Maybe Adam can answer, but I think his intention was to support both
formats, to provide more flexibility for users.