On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 05:55:29PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: >On 21 November 2017 at 15:07, <alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:21:52AM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: >>> - Document the autoselect process >>>Information about about What, Why, and [ideally] How - analogous to >>>the normal stable nominations. >>>Insert reference to the process in the patch notification email. >> >> I agree with this one, and it'll definitely happen. The story behind >> this is that this is all based on Julia Lawall's work which is well >> documented in a published paper here: >> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__soarsmu.github.io_papers_icse12-2Dpatch.pdf&d=DwIBaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=bUtaaC9mlBij4OjEG_D-KPul_335azYzfC4Rjgomobo&m=fv1wuXCQm6WYyxCaomxaGGxNXY-K4gUrTY4VOx24NXw&s=9BjAjAQOia0gDJdPjQJYuyj3vYKPJ3RXNRQaA-Y7eug&e= >> >> I have modified inputs and process, but it essentially is very similar >> to what's described in that paper. >> >> While I have no problem with sharing what I have so far, this is >> still very much work in progress, and things keep constantly changing >> based on comments I receive from reviewers and Greg, so I want to >> reach a more stable point before trying to explain things and change >> my mind the day after :) >> >> If anyone is really interested in seeing the guts of this mess I >> currently have I can push it to github, but bear in mind that in it's >> current state it's very custom to the configuration I have, and is >> a borderline unreadable mix of bash scripts and LUA. >> >> Ideally it'll all get cleaned up and pushed anyways once I feel >> comfortable with the quality of the process. >> >At first I would focus on What and Why. Getting that information out >and publicising it via that blogs, G+, meetings, etc. is essential. >Reference to the current [WIP or not] heuristics is nice but can >follow-up in due time. A placeholder must be available though. I ended up getting a few more requests to dig into this, and I'm always happy to get more eyes on it, so I'll clean it up slightly and push whatever code I have to github and let anyone who wants see how it works and improve it. Should be done shortly after the upcoming holiday :) >>> - Make the autoselect nominations _more_ distinct than the normal stable ones. >>>Maintainers will want to put more cognitive effort into the patches. >> >> So this came up before, and the participants of that thread agreed >> that adding "AUTOSEL" in the patch prefix is sufficient. What else >> would you suggest adding? >> >Being consistent [with existing stable nominations style] is good, but >first focus* should be on making it noticeable and distinct. >In other words - do _not_ be consistent. > >Flipping the order AUTOSEL PATCH, using WARN, NOTE or just dropping >PATCH should help. >People tend to read PATC..... /xx: ... last words of commit message. > >Additionally, different template + a big note/warning in the email >body is a good idea. Say: >WARNING: This patch is nominated via the autosel procedure as defined at $ref. > >HTH >Emil > >* Regardless if autosel patches default to "ACK to merge" or not. I really didn't want to mess with the usual patch tagging ("[PATCH*") since I'm afraid it'll interfere with people's mail rules (it would, at least, in my case) and may cause people to miss this mail. -- Thanks, Sasha _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
