Re: Adding Series Dependency to Patchwork

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

My view is that if the patchwork project is trying to get away from
integer based series dependencies and use a more authoritative key
like the message ID when associating series, we should follow suit in
terms of DPDK submission guidelines. So I think the "Depends-on:
<20240712120000-1-user@example.com>" format sounds fine.

But, obviously this will require a policy change and update to the
DPDK submission guidelines, so I'm curious what others outside of UNH
think.

I will add it to the discussion list for next Thursday's CI meeting.

Thanks Adam.

On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 4:14 PM Adam Hassick <ahassick@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> We've gotten a review of our initial submission to add the dependency
> parsing to the Patchwork dashboard. Stephen recommends that we change
> our format to use the message ID of patches or cover letters rather
> than the ID of the patch or series in the database. So, instead of
> adding a dependency by adding "Depends-on: series-5678" one would add
> "Depends-on: <20240712120000-1-user@example.com>". We can keep the
> option of using the patchwork web URLs that was discussed in the
> original issue on GitHub.
>
> The main reasoning for this is that our format doesn't make it clear
> exactly what the dependency is or where it's found outside of the
> context of Patchwork. This discussion can be viewed here:
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/patchwork/patch/20240617221900.156155-3-ahassick@iol.unh.edu/
>
> Does this change sound reasonable?
>
> Regards,
> Adam