This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Starting to track patches through bugzilla


After discussing it on IRC (the words "This is trivial" were uttered, the gauntlet laid down, and the challenge taken up), i'm starting to work on tracking patches +followup discussion through bugzilla, so that they don't get lost, and so we can associate bugs as being blocked on the patches that fix them (and whatnot).


An example can be seen at http://dberlin.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11757



Userids it can't determine (due to non-existent bugzilla accounts or not writing from the same email address you use in your bugzilla mail) are currently set to me, rather than creating them new accounts. It'll likely just be set to an "unknown commenter" account with the from pasted into the text of their followup.


The bugs from 11750 onwards are patches processed from the gcc-patches archive since June.

The idea is to get something that is "good enough", but not in the way or annoying to deal with.

An example of this theory is that patches with subjects not starting with [PATCH] don't get processed (and any followup referencing them won't get processed as a result). This is good enough, since people are supposed to do it. Patches that don't do it have the same chance as before of being lost in the ether.

I'll probably make a patch component/version so that they don't get the defaults (2.95/pending), since their is no way to tell either, and trying to make people put this info in would probably not actually happen, and just cause the patch tracker to be less used.

The only real thing left is a way to note that patches should be closed.

This will require some special keyword in the followups that we can notice, like a single line containing "NOPE or APPROVED".
(we've been discussing trying to use the cvs commit messages in some way to do this automatically, but it's really non-trivial)


It already handles attachments.

It doesn't attempt to seperate the inline diffs from the messages, though i'm sure this could be added later on.

Thoughts?

Trivial feature requests?

Note that people with mailers that don't set references/in-reply-to properly, of course, won't get pasted into the bug as a followup.
This of course, only affects a few well-known people using EVIL MAILERS(TM), and this feature should be considered part of the ongoing worldwide conspiracy to get them to move to a reasonable mailer.



--Dan



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]