[PATCH 00/11] Add labels support
andrew.donnellan at au1.ibm.com
Fri Aug 10 12:00:01 AEST 2018
On 09/08/18 18:54, Daniel Axtens wrote:
>> This series starts work on the latter of these by addressing yet another
>> issues, #22 . Full details of the feature are provided inline but
>> tl;dr labels are arbitrary bits of metadata that can be used to
>> represent some of the more orthogonal states like "RFC" or "Under
>> Review" along with other maintainer-provided labels. Once we have
>> support for this, we can build upon it to migrate some of the 'states'
>> to labels and the 'state' field itself to a boolean field. This is all
>> in the future though.
> So I haven't read through the patches in great detail, but I want to
> just query the idea that RFC is orthogonal. I understand a bunch of
> maintainers have a general policy of not merging RFC patches, so if
> something is posted as RFC they just mark it as RFC on Patchwork and
> then don't ever look at it again.
+ mpe: I think we touched on this issue of the orthogonality of the RFC
classification when we were chatting about snowpatch things the other day?
Andrew Donnellan OzLabs, ADL Canberra
andrew.donnellan at au1.ibm.com IBM Australia Limited
More information about the Patchwork