[PATCH 1/2] Use an explicit initial default patch state

Wolfgang Denk wd at denx.de
Mon Apr 30 20:08:51 EST 2012


Dear Dirk,

In message <20120430093133.GA6118 at bottich> you wrote:
>
> > Um... but is it really working?
> > 
> > I added "X-patchwork-state: Accepted" to a reply on a patch; my reply
> > was correctly added to the respective PW entry
> > (http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/155545/) but the status did not
> > change.
> > 
> > Am I doing something wrong?
> 
> You can only request an initial state (e.g. RFC) when submitting the
> patch -- in the same mail as the patch.  Changing the state later on by
> mail is problematic due to the lack of authentication, I'd say.  But you
> can do that with pwclient.

Oops.   Then I completely misunderstood the purpose of this oatch.

Assinging an _initial_ state seems bogus to me - the initial state is
always "New" - what else shouldit be?  Normally it is not the Submitter
who decides about the processing of the patch.

OK, this leaves 'X-Patchwork-Delegate' which could still be useful.


Of course I can use pwclient - but this is exactly what I want to get
rid of.  I want to have a single user interface to use patchwork - I
do NOT want to have to switch between MUA to reply to a message _and_
use another tool (browser or pwclient) to change the patch state.

I am looking for a way to do this in a _single_ step, using _one_ tool
only.


Regarding security: would it be acceptable if (for example per
repository, or even per user) we could opt to enable such function for
the mail addresses registered as admins?  Yes, it would be trivial to
fake such an address.  But in my case I would be willing to accept
this risk for the added convenience.would it be acceptable if (for
example per repository, or even per user) we could opt to enable such
function for the mail addresses registered as admins?  Yes, it would
be trivial to fake such an address.  But in my case I would be willing
to accept this risk for the added convenience.

As is, I'm about to give up use of Patchwork because I find the
additional effort to manage the patch states way too high.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Sorry, but my karma just ran over your dogma.


More information about the Patchwork mailing list