workflows.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
	pabeni@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, workflows@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: document patchwork patch states
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 12:23:19 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230828122319.6ba6c400@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230828190911.GR14596@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>

On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 22:09:11 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > +New, Under review  pending review, patch is in the maintainer’s queue for review  
> 
> Is there a meaningful distinction between "New" and "Under review", or
> are they exactly the same ? The former sounds like nobody has looked at
> the patch yet, while the latter seems to indicate someone has assigned
> the task of reviewing the patch to themselves, but maybe netdev uses
> those two states differently ?

The honest answer is that I don't know. I used to think that the
distinction is as you described - after someone done the initial triage
on the patch it goes New -> Under review.

But there's little consistency with that happening and it's unclear what
"initial triage" constitutes at this stage, so for all practical
purposes New == Under review.

> > +Accepted           patch was applied to the appropriate networking tree, this is
> > +                   usually set automatically by the pw-bot
> > +Needs ACK          waiting for an ack from an area maintainer or testing  
> 
> How does this differ from "Under review" ?

This indicates that netdev maintainers are waiting for someone who
is not a netdev maintainer. Let me s/maintainer/expert/ to make that
clearer-ish.

      reply	other threads:[~2023-08-28 19:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-08-28 18:44 Jakub Kicinski
2023-08-28 19:05 ` Randy Dunlap
2023-08-28 19:17   ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-08-28 19:17     ` Randy Dunlap
2023-08-28 19:09 ` Laurent Pinchart
2023-08-28 19:23   ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230828122319.6ba6c400@kernel.org \
    --to=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox