Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] Removed unused PCDs

[Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>]

Hi Ray,

On 10/08/18 05:07, Ni, Ruiyu wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 6:14 PM
>> To: Ni, Ruiyu <ruiyu.ni@intel.com>; Zhang, Chao B <chao.b.zhang@intel.com>
>> Cc: Zhang, Shenglei <shenglei.zhang@intel.com>; edk2-devel@lists.01.org;
>> Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [edk2] [PATCH v3 00/16] Removed unused PCDs
>>
>> Ray, Chao,
>>
>> guys, you keep breaking the development process. Please fix your email
>> clients *now*.
>>
>> This is not the first time it has happened. If I remember correctly, Ray blamed
>> his email client last time (not showing message threads correctly, or
>> something similar).
>>
>> I'm sorry, but this is unacceptable. This is on-going, systemic disregard for the
>> project's other participants.
>>
>> Please fix your mail user agents *now*.
>>
>> Here's my promise. Next time, I'm going to revert such commits (assuming I
>> manage to catch them again). They do not represent the facts from the
>> mailing list.
> 
> Sorry about that. I can understand it.
> So this is the first mail I choose to reply after a long holiday.
> I am now using Mozilla Thunderbird to only receive mails from this mailing list.
> This mail client can group the mails correctly so if I missed any R-b that's absolutely
> my fault😊
> 
> There is a difference between help-to-push for Intel developers and non-Intel developers.
> As the Intel developer, Shenglei is very kind to prepare the patch files with R-b and
> send to me internally as attachments. All I need to do is pushing the patches.
> Before the pushing, I will check whether there is R-b but won't check whether all R-bs
> are there.
> 
> For non-Intel developers, I will edit the patch to list all R-bs before pushing.
> 
> Again, thanks for enforcing the process. We will follow the process more strictly in future.

Thank you for following up.

Traditionally, going through the review feedback, and picking up R-b /
T-b and similar tags, are the maintainer's task, involving a git-rebase
with "reword" operations, and the final push. I'm not sure how it helps
to split this work, for any given /single/ series, between multiple
people. To me it seems difficult to coordinate.

It definitely makes sense to distribute /multiple/ series over a pool of
maintainers. I think it's the sub-series granularity that is difficult.

In edk2's case, if I remember correctly, there have been some series
even that modified multiple Packages, and were finally pushed by a
single maintainer (after everything had been fully reviewed). That's a
good approach.

If I can help with pushing a patch set at any time (because it is fully
reviewed, but it's hard to find the time to wrangle the patches), please
ping me, on-list or off-list, as you prefer.

(We might also end up updating the workflow so that it become less
error-prone when not using the git command line.)

Thanks!
Laszlo