From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C71041756 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 23:11:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io1-f67.google.com (mail-io1-f67.google.com [209.85.166.67]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95C8888E for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 23:11:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f67.google.com with SMTP id e20so41540910iob.9 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:11:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-f53.google.com (mail-io1-f53.google.com. [209.85.166.53]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d6sm17534953iod.17.2019.08.26.16.11.21 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:11:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f53.google.com with SMTP id b10so32604571ioj.2 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:11:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190826230206.GC28066@mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20190826230206.GC28066@mit.edu> From: Doug Anderson Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:11:12 -0700 Message-ID: To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Joel Fernandes , Barret Rhoden , ksummit , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jonathan Nieder , Tomasz Figa , Han-Wen Nienhuys , Theodore Tso , David Rientjes , Dmitry Torokhov , Dmitry Vyukov Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Allowing something Change-Id (or something like it) in kernel commits List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 4:02 PM Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 02:35:33PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > > * This requires extra tooling that I think nobody will adopt. People > > today already (accidentally) adopt Change-Id in the non-discardable > > portion. I think it would be easier to get everyone currently > > removing Change-Id to start including it again than it will be to get > > everyone to change their tools to move it to the discardable portion. > > The reason why people Change-Id's exist in commits today is because of > tooling which is distributed as part of Gerrit. That's why people are > deeply suspicious of any solution that involves Change-Id in the > non-discarded portion --- because the majority of Gerrit servers up > until now are behind corporate firewalls and since Gerrit servers have > robots.txt files, most Change-Id tend to be useless. > > If we come up with new tooling which is more useful, people will use > it. If it's not useful and doesn't makes life easier, people won't. Unfortunately the tooling won't come up until Change-Id is there and Change-Id can't be there till the tooling is there. ;-) > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 03:06:43PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > > 2. If, as I expect, Change-Id as part of the patch stays NAKed then I > > will modify the tools I use to post upstream (currently patman) to > > encode the Change-Id. My naive proposal would be: > > > > Message-Id: ChangeId-YYYY-MMDD-HHMMSS-PatchNum > > > > If I try this and it works for me then I will post out and suggest > > that any other like-minded people encode Change-Id into Message-Id in > > a similar way. > > ... and I would expect patches with this would get NACK'ed because > they would be just as useless as Change-Id's are perceived to be > today. People who are gaming the rules will tend not to looked upon > favorably; the same will apply to their patches. Sigh. Email is so hard to communicate over. I'm not intending to include the Message-Id in the commit. I'm intending to use the Change-Id _in_ the Message-Id. The Message-Id already has a bunch of random characters in it. Why not make them useful for something? > BTW, the Message-Id you've listed above is not legal, per RFC-5322. A > msg-id has to look like a e-mail address (left-hand-side@example.com). > So something like this is legal as a message id: > > I3268f9036512c4378cde1da37e0612b43ed4d384@linux-review.googlesource.com I think this is the same comment that Thomas Gleixner had. I will certainly make sure my Message-Ids are formed correctly. Thank you both for pointing this out to me. Presumably I would have noticed it when actually trying to implement this but now I definitely will. > ... and indeed, that's more useful, because it tells us how to > interpret I3268f9036512c4378cde1da37e0612b43ed4d384 --- it's a > Change-Id assigned by the linux-review.googlesource.com Gerrit server. > > In contrast a bare "I3268f9036512c4378cde1da37e0612b43ed4d384" is > going to be presumed to be useless. And in fact, a Google search for > this ID returns *nothing*. Yet visiting the link > https://linux-review.googlesource.com/c/1158 actually returns > something useful. That's why the latter is superior to the former. Sure, except that in my case there is no gerrit server to provide a link to. I use an upstream-first approach which means that all initial work is done with mailing lists. There is no server to provide context to. I think we are re-hashing old emails in this thread. > In summary, > > Not useful: (and will be probably nacked) > > Change-Id: I3268f9036512c4378cde1da37e0612b43ed4d384 > Message-Id: I3268f9036512c4378cde1da37e0612b43ed4d384 > > Useful: > > Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/c/1158 > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190826204407.17759-1-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org > > Not as useful: (people will prefer the Link example above) > > Message-Id: 20190826204407.17759-1-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org Presumably all the above is because you thought I was including the Message-Id in the commit. I'm not. Locally I will have Change-Id in my commit. The scripts I use to post to the mailing lists will strip the Change-Id out and use it to make the actual Message-Id. I will make sure that the Message ID is well formed. -Doug