On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 at 19:05, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres@jeltef.nl> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 at 03:21, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Couple of suggestions: a) No need to show CI status as "Needs rebase,"
> > "Not processed," etc., for committed patches.
>
> Do you mean specifically for committed ones? Or just for any patch
> with a "closed" status.
It is for any closed status patches.
> > b) Can we add a filter
> > for "Needs rebase!"? This would help the CommitFest manager easily
> > list patches that need updating.
>
> That should be pretty easy to implement. But is that really what we
> want? In the next release, sorting by "failing since" is implemented.
> It sounds like that could be enough instead. i.e. do we really only
> want to call out patches that need a rebase? Or also ones that have
> been failing in CI for a long time?
>
> I'm even wondering if this whole flow still makes sense. Do we really
> want to send an email to the mailing list about this? And if so, why
> is someone doing that manually? If people subscribe to updates for
> patches that they authored, then they get these "needs rebase"
> automatically. Should we maybe simply default that option to true? And
> for instance send a notification automatically to all people with a
> "needs rebase" CI status whenever we start a new commitfest.
It will be good if you can send a notification automatically to the
patch requiring a rebase when the CFBot first identifies this(not only
during the start of commitfest) and probably send this notification
once in a day for 3 or so days and then change the status to "waiting
on author" if a new rebased version is not posted in this time.
Regards,
Vignesh
