From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8C1A2DA776; Mon, 15 Sep 2025 11:26:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757935606; cv=none; b=CD7aVyCAleR73xGey07ze7Z1c7Izce/+5DJDmtwqZHNC7l2T/2MHjaFMu+m6sdxQMHAiW3K4hquTKG70nVnI6K8wK8XWNS1mtVowXWioNlL30ATYtKmU7HXlvh93quyQjqXMaoSFtjjkFBN/wa6dDPfKiEzuAhLhgvsyB6NerUM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757935606; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MTehY0L7uXZCtPEzcuwk4qrp/9Xzk7WlwWtRRzf69nM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=XYaVmfaaq2LHhHTjlvmyyGdU37q4YRd55kmwJojeOs9JjYCkzgF9UZH8zr3JnwjnEbaKNi1Y27v3E/sD+2SgIiK0lQbPAtcuNFFjwfuxSQhTGKRMz2bq3Zvzsv5o10NV40ld0gWJc8+E8jZY7a0Sswwm7TMpyr+uQPycKjkBArc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Ja2DteoC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Ja2DteoC" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 799B6C4CEF5; Mon, 15 Sep 2025 11:26:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1757935606; bh=MTehY0L7uXZCtPEzcuwk4qrp/9Xzk7WlwWtRRzf69nM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Ja2DteoCLWBcoQe/EXbxKqauAGJ4iwyxNYv7AoxghgC5mJ3xo4QWm9XvLYKDjZ6pL vfY0ONPbDs4dBFqb0QVkKsXSCBPamLAC2bsu2eqXKZ8EBqT8FBwOCZaO5dGjtG0tj1 YWviD32b6yhr9MeWyDhlIAJxGgxoEgXOk1MwhrIM/1mupxfww5bN6SoQMkM0F4dfYf 3cu++4MzXsD5TUxXRYrcF9Nh7RBC2/H5/jkdeu53vm1iCx6jZrSnIgS9ZLfXbYaxyM /JZKnl/j/UUxTHxsewbiFWDiv9pOGs5rlabExKW30rF/th9HC7ks5po4RBkXIpzXCm 1Sq4ZkKh+l/Pg== Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 12:26:41 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Sasha Levin Cc: Nicolas Frattaroli , konstantin@linuxfoundation.org, axboe@kernel.dk, csander@purestorage.com, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org, Laurent Pinchart Subject: Re: [RFC] b4 dig: Add AI-powered email relationship discovery command Message-ID: <6e25b2e7-67a2-4a92-95d5-adb279e811a7@sirena.org.uk> References: <20250905-sparkling-stalwart-galago-8a87e0@lemur> <4764751.e9J7NaK4W3@workhorse> <4278380.jE0xQCEvom@workhorse> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="NgoFlW9mbzgjnno5" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: We've upped our standards, so up yours! --NgoFlW9mbzgjnno5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 03:57:30PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > We've started[1] the workflows@ list (which is how I stumbled on this thr= ead) > about 5-6 years ago when the concern from multiple maintainers was that w= e all > have our magical scripts, they are seriously ugly, and everyone are asham= ed of > sharing them. So this list was an effort to get the ball rolling on folks > sharing some of those ugly workflows and scripts in an attempt to standar= dize > and improve our processes. > I've shared this very hacky b4-dig script as exactly that: I have a very = ugly > bash script that addresses some of the issues Linus brought up around bei= ng > able to find more context for a given patch/mail. I use that script ofte= n, it > helps me spend less time on browsing lore (no, dfn: won't find you syzbot > reports or CI failures), and it just "works for me". This seems like a great example of a situation where the suggestions =66rom one of the other thread of asking people to clearly mark when patch submissions are using these tools would have helped - had the submission described the above then the Python level review would've gone a lot differently I think. Realising during review is a totally different experience to being told up front. --NgoFlW9mbzgjnno5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmjH9/AACgkQJNaLcl1U h9A7Wwf/beY2mgQEzSNuH//PeCC2wwtz5SKeaxX3/H7dBle9cqLQag46TsbxYgkZ ahjRVZP44x/QoF10zwmVQ31vBVKlcGi78TBmmjpUrAMkPn5GZTMdBrTotUwnqyJE uqaPDhU3LC9Q5M0HKJtfV0ntBrZIVVDGYQxcU89GED5m/ZFmZF6NDejJWDW87K96 8P9e+2Eqt4fB3qQqkRJSdeFfTMGnIW0KZEjyMN/KAydh6X1paG6rPXNUTtgRAybl 1crvZGjC3Ag959QcKjB/VbEeIJjk5SWq+jXfg7+ofMTN/7AAWa3Vz7E7AODz7ptn Z7o5X8IjxnNtnKyMrlemCresCauiWQ== =Zh1E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --NgoFlW9mbzgjnno5--