Re: Patch review/application process

diff --git a/0e/47c0a90d15c158819e9f5bb99b414a42e6e64b b/0e/47c0a90d15c158819e9f5bb99b414a42e6e64b
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..f175fb8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/0e/47c0a90d15c158819e9f5bb99b414a42e6e64b
@@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
+Return-Path: <bremner@unb.ca>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BD42431FB6\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue,  1 Nov 2011 12:55:38 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -2.29\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id ERqagqeaAFjc for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Tue,  1 Nov 2011 12:55:38 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from tempo.its.unb.ca (tempo.its.unb.ca [131.202.1.21])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF440431FD0\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue,  1 Nov 2011 12:55:37 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from convex-new.cs.unb.ca ([131.202.13.154])\r
+       by tempo.its.unb.ca (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pA1JtNC9019852;\r
+       Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:55:23 -0300\r
+Received: from bremner by convex-new.cs.unb.ca with local (Exim 4.72)\r
+       (envelope-from <bremner@unb.ca>)\r
+       id 1RLKQc-0007RY-Vv; Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:55:22 -0300\r
+From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>\r
+To: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>,\r
+       Daniel Schoepe <daniel@schoepe.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: Patch review/application process\r
+In-Reply-To: <87sjm74z36.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+References: <878vo8kdl2.fsf@gilead.invalid> <87hb2n7w82.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+       <87sjm74z36.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.9+29~g4efaa70 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1\r
+       (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:55:03 -0300\r
+Message-ID: <87vcr3ehyg.fsf@convex-new.cs.unb.ca>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
+       micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 19:55:38 -0000\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable\r
+\r
+On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 08:55:09 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestr=\r
+ucture.net> wrote:\r
+> On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 11:28:45 -0300, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wro=\r
+te:\r
+> > Maybe you can tag those patches as "notmuch::reviewed" using nmbug? [1]\r
+> > My idea is that=20\r
+> >=20\r
+> >    notmuch search tag:notmuch::patch and tag:notmuch::reviewed\r
+> >=20\r
+> > should give a kind of consensus set of "ready to go" patch sets.\r
+>=20\r
+> Don't forget notmuch::applied, which I think is actually one of the most\r
+> important.  Review is easy to see by looking at the patch thread.  Being\r
+> able to easily find which patches have not yet been applied to master is\r
+> what I'm most looking forward to.\r
+\r
+Jamie knows this from IRC, but I have been using "notmuch::pushed" for\r
+this.\r
+\r
+One thing I think we need to clarify a bit is are we tagging whole\r
+threads or individual messages in the database.  Because of the way\r
+notmuch search works, I had been tagging whole threads with\r
+notmuch::pushed (effectively to "mute" them) in the search\r
+\r
+                notmuch search tag:notmuch::patch and \\r
+                        not tag:notmuch::pushed\r
+\r
+This is a bit aesthetically unappealing, anad every time someone replies\r
+to a thread it is effectively unmuted.\r
+\r
+Since we don't have thread tagging yet (where e.g. tags are\r
+automagically applied to new messages I was thinking it might work have\r
+a tag like "notmuch::todo" and something like the following workflow\r
+(for patches)\r
+\r
+initially tag +notmuch::patch +notmuch::todo\r
+\r
+then when we "dispose" of the patch somehow, remove the notmuch::todo tag a=\r
+nd\r
+replace with\r
+        notmuch::pushed\r
+        notmuch::obsolete\r
+        or...\r
+\r
+Then we could do e.g.\r
+\r
+     notmuch search tag:notmuch::patch and tag:notmuch::todo and tag:notmuc=\r
+h::reviewed\r
+\r
+to get an "integrators queue" (Well, the more like an unordered pile\r
+than a queue. One problem at a time).\r
+\r
+David\r
+\r
+\r
+\r
+\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
+\r
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)\r
+\r
+iJwEAQECAAYFAk6wTpcACgkQTiiN/0Um85lfuQQAs1yp/yTYM7ji1YXRlNKhxcK3\r
+Skd70H44CNapyk9kUESwd9gGTnzrbFleLKR0k6GdNt07Pvo+wX7/1Nmck7K4lhXP\r
+84bSq4u89iF/QU/qaTJzDV92wNsNExZf+nZPbr51dmKLF6z9UfxlubAR/Kw/S6M6\r
+KNBUwxsvHpISFCxsa40=\r
+=jHKq\r
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+--=-=-=--\r