From: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
To: Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: users@linux.kernel.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: Github PR bot questions
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 13:42:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFd5g44cerCLF6yd_voFAEr9B+G4bLPve-ARVv8N30pHj9Zdzg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210616171813.bwvu6mtl4ltotf7p@nitro.local>
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 10:18 AM Konstantin Ryabitsev
<konstantin@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Hi, all:
>
> I've been doing some work on the "github-pr-to-ml" bot that can monitor GitHub
> pull requests on a project and convert them into fully well-formed patch
> series. This would be a one-way operation, effectively turning Github into a
> fancy "git-send-email" replacement. That said, it would have the following
> benefits for both submitters and maintainers:
Neat! I have been going from the other direction, trying to take
patches sent to LKML (actually from the kselftest mailing list) and
upload them to Gerrit:
https://linux-review.googlesource.com/
My thinking was that most developers would want to keep sending
patches via git-send-email, but sometimes it is really nice to have a
side-by side diff without having to download a patch and apply it
somewhere. Also, sometimes it is nice to have all the comments on code
in a single place (I have got it able to extract comments from emails
- although not super reliably).
I was thinking it might be nice to be able to go both directions, but
it had not been on the top of my priority list.
> - submitters would no longer need to navigate their way around
> git-format-patch, get_maintainer.pl, and git-send-email -- nor would need to
> have a patch-friendly outgoing mail gateway to properly contribute patches
I like having the tools run automatically, that was something I wanted
to do with my LKML-Gerrit-Bridge at some point.
> - subsystem maintainers can configure whatever CI pre-checks they want before
> the series is sent to them for review (and we can work on a library of
> Github actions, so nobody needs to reimplement checkpatch.pl multiple times)
That would be awesome!
> - the bot should (eventually) be clever enough to automatically track v1..vX
> on pull request updates, assuming the API makes it straightforward
Yeah, that's something I have wanted to do with the
LKML-Gerrit-Bridge. This would be super awesome!
> A this point, I need your input to make sure I'm not going down any wrong
> paths:
>
> - My general assumption is that putting this bot on github.com/torvalds/linux
> would not be useful, as this will probably result in more noise than signal.
> I expect that subsystem maintainers would prefer to configure their own
> GitHub projects so they can have full control on what kind of CI prechecks
> must succeed before the series is sent out. Is that a valid assumption, or
> should I be working towards having a single point of submission on each
> forge platform (Github, Gitlab, etc)?
I would like to be able to run KUnit tests, and I am sure other
maintainers would want to run other tests. Beyond that, I don't think
I would want to deviate from your above defaults too much.
> - We can *probably* track when patch series get applied and auto-close pull
> requests that are accepted -- but it's not going to be perfect (we'd
> basically be using git-patch-id to match commits to pull requests). Or is it
> better to auto-close the pull request right after it's sent to the list with
> a message like "thank you, please monitor your email for the rest of the
> process"? The latter is much easier for me, of course. :)
That would be super awesome as well. My plan with the
LKML-Gerrit-Bridge was to leave it open until applied and then have
some sort of timeout.
> I'll probably have more questions as I go along, but I wanted to start with
> these two.
Not sure how far along you are with this. But I would love to see this
happen. It sounds like you are planning on supporting most of the
features I am trying to get in LKML-Gerrit-Bridge, but not all - I
mainly would like to get patches uploaded from the mailing lists. I am
not sure how much we could collaborate here depending on how far along
you are. I saw some concerns in some other emails about relying on
open source, Gerrit could be a solution to that. Anyway, let me know
if you are interested in my project. You can see my code here:
https://github.com/google/lkml-gerrit-bridge
Also note, I said "I" above, but I have gotten some contributions from
others. I'm not trying to take credit away from them, more that I
don't want them to take blame for any of my bad ideas. Also, this is
in NO WAY a plug for my project. It's not very stable right now, and
has some issues - it is very experimental. I am just hoping that it
can maybe be of some help to you.
Cheers
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-17 20:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-16 17:18 Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-16 17:24 ` Drew DeVault
2021-06-16 17:47 ` Johannes Berg
2021-06-16 17:55 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-16 18:13 ` Miguel Ojeda
2021-06-17 17:07 ` Serge E. Hallyn
[not found] ` <CAJhbpm_BgbSx581HU0mTCkcE28n_hRx=tv74az_mE2VBmPtrVA@mail.gmail.com>
2021-06-16 18:05 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-16 18:11 ` Miguel Ojeda
2021-06-16 18:22 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-16 18:38 ` Miguel Ojeda
2021-06-16 20:10 ` Willy Tarreau
2021-06-17 15:11 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-17 15:25 ` Willy Tarreau
2021-06-16 20:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-17 15:09 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-16 21:11 ` Rob Herring
2021-06-16 21:18 ` Stefano Stabellini
2021-06-16 21:59 ` Rob Herring
2021-06-16 22:33 ` James Bottomley
2021-06-17 14:18 ` Rob Herring
2021-06-17 14:27 ` James Bottomley
2021-06-17 6:52 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-06-17 8:20 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-06-17 8:55 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-06-17 9:33 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-06-17 9:52 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2021-06-17 14:33 ` Rob Herring
2021-06-17 15:24 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-06-17 15:38 ` Rob Herring
2021-06-17 15:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-06-17 14:02 ` Rob Herring
2021-06-17 14:47 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-17 15:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2021-06-17 15:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-06-17 15:53 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-06-17 17:15 ` Rob Herring
2021-06-17 6:37 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-06-17 7:30 ` Greg KH
2021-06-17 14:59 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-17 8:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-06-17 8:33 ` Jiri Kosina
2021-06-17 9:52 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2021-06-17 10:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-06-17 14:57 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-17 15:16 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-17 15:24 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-06-17 16:36 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2021-06-17 18:43 ` Miguel Ojeda
2021-06-17 15:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-17 17:06 ` Stefano Stabellini
2021-06-17 22:35 ` Jiri Kosina
2021-06-17 14:23 ` Miguel Ojeda
2021-06-17 20:42 ` Brendan Higgins [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=CAFd5g44cerCLF6yd_voFAEr9B+G4bLPve-ARVv8N30pHj9Zdzg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=brendanhiggins@google.com \
--cc=konstantin@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=users@linux.kernel.org \
--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