From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.byosoft.com.cn (mail.byosoft.com.cn [58.240.74.242]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.5870.1600307373787345514 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 18:49:34 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=none, err=permanent DNS error (domain: byosoft.com.cn, ip: 58.240.74.242, mailfrom: gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn) Received: from DESKTOPS6D0PVI ([58.246.60.130]) (envelope-sender ) by 192.168.6.13 with ESMTP for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 09:49:08 +0800 X-WM-Sender: gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn X-WM-AuthFlag: YES X-WM-AuthUser: gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn From: "gaoliming" To: , , "'Dong, Guo'" Cc: , "'Kinney, Michael D'" , "'Leif Lindholm \(Nuvia address\)'" , "'Doran, Mark'" , "'Andrew Fish'" , "'Guptha, Soumya K'" References: <20200818082421.6168-1-marcello.bauer@9elements.com> <11b4d671-7c5e-0ef3-0d2f-13ef605f1eaf@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: =?UTF-8?B?5Zue5aSNOiBbZWRrMi1kZXZlbF0gbW9yZSBkZXZlbG9wbWVudCBwcm9jZXNzIGZhaWx1cmUgW3dhczogVWVmaVBheWxvYWRQa2c6IFJ1bnRpbWUgTU1DT05GXQ==?= Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 09:49:08 +0800 Message-ID: <000e01d68c94$bb92d920$32b88b60$@byosoft.com.cn> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQGEDWoOUaNozhhqiMI8AjxHmuZrYgG++/VpAPX7Y60CUIwY96no4P1Q Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: zh-cn Guo: On pull request, https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EDK= -II-Development-Process#the-maintainer-process-for-the-edk-ii-project secti= on 7 gives the requirement.=20 If is a patch series, then copy the patch #0 summ= ary into the pull request description. Laszlo: I think we can enhance wiki page https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.gi= thub.io/wiki/EDK-II-Development-Process#the-maintainer-process-for-the-edk-= ii-project to add another step to reply the patch mail with the merged pull= request or commit after PR is merged.=20 Thanks Liming > -----=E9=82=AE=E4=BB=B6=E5=8E=9F=E4=BB=B6----- > =E5=8F=91=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: bounce+27952+65339+4905953+8761045@groups.i= o > =E4=BB=A3=E8=A1=A8 Laszlo= Ersek > =E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E6=97=B6=E9=97=B4: 2020=E5=B9=B49=E6=9C=8817=E6=97=A5= 2:14 > =E6=94=B6=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: Dong, Guo ; devel@edk2.= groups.io > =E6=8A=84=E9=80=81: marcello.bauer@9elements.com; Kinney, Michael D > ; Leif Lindholm (Nuvia address) > ; Doran, Mark ; Andrew Fish > ; Guptha, Soumya K > =E4=B8=BB=E9=A2=98: Re: [edk2-devel] more development process failure [w= as: > UefiPayloadPkg: Runtime MMCONF] >=20 > On 09/16/20 19:30, Dong, Guo wrote: > > > > Hi Laszlo, > > > > The patchset includes 3 patches, and all of them had been reviewed by > package owners. > > The patch submitter has a pull request > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/885, I rebased the patch to lates= t > master, and merged it by adding reviewed-by found from emails. > > I also make sure it passed all the checks before I put "push" button t= here. > then retrigger a new build with "push" button. > > > > I am not sure what is missing. If there is any other requirements, sho= uld > they be captured during code review or tool check? >=20 > - The description field of > is empty. It's difficult to tell where the patches come from -- where > they were posted and reviewed. A copy of the cover letter should have > been included here, plus preferably a link to the v5 mailing list thread > (the one that got merged in the end). >=20 > - It was not confirmed in the v5 mailing list thread that the series had > been merged. The confirmation should have included at least one of: (a) > the github PR link, (b) the git commit range. (Preferably: both.) >=20 > It's not the eventual git commits that I'm complaining about, but the > lack of communication with the community, and the lack of record for > posterity. >=20 > Myself, I used to consider github PRs a means merely for replacing our > earlier direct "git push" commands -- with a CI build + mergify. So, as > a maintainer, I would myself queue up several patch sets in a single > "batch" PR, add some links to BZs and the mailing list, and let it fly. > But then Mike told me this was really wrong, and we should clearly > associate any given PR with a specific patch set on the list. >=20 > This meant an *immense* workload increase for me, in particular because > I tend to merge patch sets for *other* people and subsystems too (after > they pass review), that is, for such subsystems that I do not > co-maintain. In particular during the feature freeze periods. >=20 > So what really rubs me the wrong way is that, if I am expected to keep > all of this meta-data nice and tidy, why aren't some other maintainers? > It's a double standard. >=20 > I can live with either *all of us* ignoring PR tidiness, or *all of us* > doing our best to keep everything nicely cross-referenced. >=20 > But right now I spend significant time and effort on keeping > communication and records complete and clean in *all three of* bugzilla, > github, and mailing list, whereas a good subset of the maintainers > couldn't care less in *either* of those communication channels. >=20 > For your reference, here's a random PR I submitted and merged for others= : >=20 > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/904 >=20 > Observe in PR#904: >=20 > - title carries cover letter subject > - description carries cover letter body > - description has a pointer to the BZ, and a link to the cover letter in > the mailing list archive (two links in fact, in different archives) >=20 > And then here's my report back on the list: >=20 > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/64644 >=20 > And my BZ comment to the same effect (also closing the BZ as > RESOLVED|FIXED): >=20 > https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D2376#c9 > https://edk2.groups.io/g/bugs/message/12777 >=20 >=20 > I don't insist on the particular information content of github PRs, as > -- at this stage -- they really are not more than just a way to set off > CI, before pushing/merging a series. >=20 > What I do insist on is that all of us maintainers (people with > permission to set the "push" label) be subject to the same expectations > when it comes to creating pull requests. >=20 > (Please note also that I absolutely don't need a BZ for every > contribution. My request is only that *if* there is a BZ, then handle it > thoroughly.) >=20 > Laszlo >=20 >=20 > > > > Thanks, > > Guo > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Laszlo > >> Ersek > >> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2020 1:57 AM > >> To: Dong, Guo > >> Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; marcello.bauer@9elements.com; Kinney, > Michael D > >> ; Leif Lindholm (Nuvia address) > >> ; Doran, Mark ; Andrew Fish > >> ; Guptha, Soumya K > >> Subject: [edk2-devel] more development process failure [was: > UefiPayloadPkg: > >> Runtime MMCONF] > >> > >> Guo, > >> > >> On 08/18/20 10:24, Marcello Sylvester Bauer wrote: > >>> Support arbitrary platforms with different or even no MMCONF space. > >>> Fixes crash on platforms not exposing 256 buses. > >>> > >>> Tested on: > >>> * AMD Stoney Ridge > >>> > >>> Branch: https://github.com/9elements/edk2-1/tree/UefiPayloadPkg- > >> MMCONF > >>> PR: https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/885 > >>> > >>> v5: > >>> * MdePkg > >>> - support variable size MMCONF in all PciExpressLibs > >>> - use (UINTX)-1 as return values for invalid Pci addresses > >> > >> Okay, so we got more of the same development process violations here,= as > >> I've just reported at . > >> > >> See this new pull request: > >> > >> https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/932/ > >> > >> "No description provided." > >> > >> You should be embarrassed. > >> > >> Laszlo > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20