RISC-V Patchwork

[Conor Dooley]

On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 05:07:45PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> As one or two people have already noticed, we've resurrected the
> patchwork for the RISC-V list @
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-riscv/list/
> 
> The patchwork bot should let people know when their patches have been
> applied. Hopefully it'll help people track what the status of their
> patches are a little better and try to prevent stuff falling through
> the cracks in Palmer's inbox.
> 
> As an FYI, the statuses that are intended to be used are:
> - New: No action has been taken yet
> - Under Review: The maintainer is waiting for review comments from others

We had the first patchwork sync meeting thing today & one of the things
that came up was the lack of granularity of the "Under Review" status.
Currently, things that Palmer needs to look at were marked as "Under
Review" & delegated to him. There's no way with that "strategy" to
determine at a glance which patches were low-hanging fruit or important
fixes etc, versus things that need his input to progress but are not
applicable yet.

Since the number of statuses that mean a patch shows up in the "Action
Required" state is rather limited, we're going to try modifying the use
of "New" and "Under Review". What we will give a go is:

- New & no delegate: No action has been taken yet & the patch is not
  likely to land for the upcoming release nor is a fix.

- New & delegated to Palmer: The patch is not likely to land for the
  upcoming release nor is a fix, but Palmer's input on it is required to
  make progress.

- Under Review & delegated to Palmer: Trivial changes, urgent fixes for
 this release & content that is likely ready to be merged for this window.

- Under Review & no delegate: Fixes or content that is likely to be ready
  for this window, but is waiting for review comments from others.

Hopefully I've accurately captured what was said, scream if I have not.

A new status was also adopted:

- Needs Ack: The patch is not intended for the RISC-V tree, but an Ack
  from Palmer is needed.

If anyone wants to come along to the patchwork sync calls, check out
Palmer's invite email:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/mhng-775d4068-6c1e-48a4-a1dc-b4a76ff26bb3@palmer-ri-x1c9a/

> - Changes Requested: Either the maintainer or a reviewer requested
>   changes in the patch. The patch author is expected to submit a new
>   version
> - Superseded: There's a new version of the patch available
> - Not Applicable: The patch is not intended for the RISC-V tree
> - Accepted: The patch has been applied
> - Rejected: The patch has been rejected, with reasons stated in an
>   email