From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CF22C388F3 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 03:58:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2098B20815 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 03:58:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=axtens.net header.i=@axtens.net header.b="fFLPzfgo" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726784AbfJAD6p (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 23:58:45 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f194.google.com ([209.85.210.194]:39841 "EHLO mail-pf1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726590AbfJAD6p (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 23:58:45 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f194.google.com with SMTP id v4so6951850pff.6 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 20:58:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=axtens.net; s=google; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=akg6b685IGsieFNDUb4MAb44/1ayQrh3jWaYqq1k8j4=; b=fFLPzfgoyyPx6AntvMuJ8o846aBpu67v5WYwyP++WbSqMD6SbgaNGWAASZGlW5QAnm dnJCXIw5i4EUD8gyk9Ny/hbJRWcHmr4YGbMWRKhiJM+hgWzBj+gbTAR/aftZqcgnnhnb jdviBMg/Yf/eEVllye0A7x00efQCj/iWAvRPA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=akg6b685IGsieFNDUb4MAb44/1ayQrh3jWaYqq1k8j4=; b=BxFU+Okl4wFWh2Q0iiyJIlo/uT9wAECbY3ieALI82e8OmNlUHSK98eKCEnxkQ6DujJ UC4X3vEJVC6umu/HQpWwSJyjrQG485nbEfPHGlGm9EHWmSM10S3bI7rQfaYehs278YWH mqGOAZrXV2y6LSRD0H5f1t2q7hTCWFrR/W8DCfj5ooGDsUiYeYY7UNLmbY9PLfuo+qR6 lnkpkTs//03m47rVFu8pP0lRDW2kBIbH4tNH0DqleW7Mf1LxoyVBULAvAe7lxJ0bzaUL yJsqQNKrLQj7ym8RZQU+JW/lC5v4fblsbGu/UckEatOox+YbY4AMfwbSml6LBQfEQxtu 3V7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV1T0tFpaM564QJTPevFsqqyO6fAxJldQ0wqJqfcjCs0U6yxhO6 VNIuznKpAxJVjspCIYyFVu+Elg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzN5BMwPi/s51HBnc90gGR27lcbFbj2rKt2F+2croDjVsfqxqjMt8Dy9Lp7dNT5v9R8iWU6Hg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:3b01:: with SMTP id d1mr2992338pjc.81.1569902323274; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 20:58:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ppp167-251-205.static.internode.on.net. [59.167.251.205]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 74sm15653433pfy.78.2019.09.30.20.58.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 20:58:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Daniel Axtens To: Eric Wong , "Theodore Y. Ts'o" Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , workflows@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Bjorn Helgaas , Jiri Kosina , Konstantin Ryabitsev Subject: Re: Kernel development collaboration platform wish list In-Reply-To: <20190924013920.GA22698@dcvr> References: <1811089.yxvLMk49Ug@kreacher> <20190923162001.GD6005@mit.edu> <20190924013920.GA22698@dcvr> Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2019 13:58:35 +1000 Message-ID: <878sq53yms.fsf@dja-thinkpad.axtens.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: workflows-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org Eric Wong writes: > "Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote: >> One of the things I'd like to add as a strong desire is the ability to >> review patches via web if that's what users would like to do. There >> are some real benefits for web-based review. It means that if you >> need to see greater context, it's relatively easy to do this. It also >> is convenient to be able to see the conversation for a particular hunk >> of code right alongside the code. > > I've already started on that with public-inbox; it's not enabled > on lore, yet(*); but public-inbox.org/git can use "git apply" > and dfpre:/dfpost: search prefixes to reconstruct git blobs out > of emailed patches. > > For example, a self-rejected patch I posted in 2016: > > https://public-inbox.org/git/20160711210243.GA1604@whir/ > > If you follow the link at the hunk header offset "+3,7", > it'll bring you to: > > https://public-inbox.org/git/8d27707/s/?b=http-walker.c#n4 > > The bottom of that page has a a "debug log:" which tells > how the blob is reconstructed using the email and pre-existing > blob. > > Since it can recreate blobs using patches, the next step is to > support showing "git diff" against reconstructed blobs with for > arbitrary contexts; but I got side-tracked from that earlier > this year... > > (*) lore could configure coderepo associations, but that's a > bear with the amount of repos kernel.org has... > >> It's clear that whatever we do, it needs to be compatible with e-mail. >> That's very clear. But it would be useful if we can support both the >> e-mail and web-based review. There have some prototypes that have >> been floated which shows that it is at least possible; perhaps >> imperfectly, but something which provides a bidrectional gateway >> between those who perfer to use e-mail and those that prefer to use a >> web-based UI would be able to do it. > > A hacker-oriented a webmail UI could be derived from > public-inbox and completely interoperable with other mail > servers (it would also support SMTP/IMAP, of course). > >> There will be many potential kernel contributors who will be used to >> web-based UI's such as those that are available on github. So while >> remaining e-mail compatible, having some way of allow as many >> operations to be done via web interfaces might help us get some newer >> developers who are more comfortable to living on the web than some of >> us more senior developers who remember when "gopher" was a text-based >> search engine, and not a mascot for the Go programming langauge. :-) > > Unfortunate, but yeah. Any web-based UIs ought to include some > subtle (or maybe not-so-subtle) hints/pointers towards > cheaper-to-run-and-likely-more-powerful tools and practices. > > I can't prove it, but it seems like public-inbox has been > successful at promoting the use of Message-IDs in URLs and > git-send-email :) FYI, the next release of Patchwork will move to message-id based URLs rather than numeric IDs. (Old URLs will still work of course! They will redirect to new URLs.) Regards, Daniel