Events for new comments for a patch series?

Don Zickus dzickus at
Fri Jan 5 04:31:07 AEDT 2018

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 02:30:04PM +0000, Stephen Finucane wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 16:23 -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I was playing with the events REST API interface and realized how
> > convenient the 'series-completed' category is.
> > 
> > I was curious if there is also a way to be notified if a new comment
> > arrived for a patch series.  We tend to use replies to patches as
> > tags for meta info.  For example, acked-by, nacked-by, and also
> > Bugzilla. There are times when a patch submitter forgets to add a
> > Bugzilla id or another id is added because the patch solves another
> > person's problem too.
> > 
> > Instead of reposting the patch series with the updated info, we tend
> > to parse the comment and update some internal tags that is connected
> > with the patch.
> > 
> > I was thinking, if having a 'events' interface that notified us a
> > certain patch series had 'new comments', our polling script could
> > retrieve and parse those comments.
> That sounds like something we could do. I did this in the initial
> version of the feature because I didn't think comments were valuable
> enough to expose. Perhaps I've called that wrong though. How would this
> compare with the Bugzilla-as-a-tag idea you've been discussing
> elsewhere though?

Hi Stephen,

Thanks for the response.  I think the bugzilla tag email I sent, covers alot
of the stuff I wanted to do.  I didn't fully understand how tags
auto-generated from comments when I initially sent this hence the different

> > Or maybe simpler, just a 'comments' REST API that when combined with
> > project and since could achieve the same thing.
> Why not both? '/events' is mostly there as an ease-of-use thing, as it
> represents the one place that one can find out about all the things
> going on in the system. There's no reason we couldn't do, for example,
> '/patches/{patchId}/comments' though.

So I would like to add some context because creating a comments api could
still be valuable to us, I am not sure.

Our internal forked instance of Patchwork tracks patches but more
importantly tracked all emails on the mailing list.  The reason for this
expansion into tracking all emails was to validate our automation was not

Now for patchwork2.0 that just means don't drop any emails not related to

Combining that idea with the comments api above, we had an objective that
every email on the list was tagged was something (ideally acked-by,
nacked-by, reviewed-by, etc).

Then we could manually process any comments that were _not_ tagged.  Now for
a public mailing list that is not strict with patch reviews this is a little

However, internally, we soon discovered broken emailers that could not thread
replies correctly (thus we lost valuable patch reviews).  We would find
mistyped acks (Akced-by or something).  Or more importantly, a patch would
have multiple acks but someone would question the patch (not outright nack
the patch but had some concerns).

The mistyped acks led to delayed patch acceptance and grumpy develoers.  The
acked patch that had a question led to grumpy developers who wanted their
questions answered before patch acceptance.

In order to capture this in a patch ready script, we decided to tag all
comments with something (acked, nacked, reviewed) or needinfo (for
questions) or needinfo_replied (for responses).  That way if a patch had
any comments not tagged if would get held up.  Or if the patch had a
'needinfo' unresponded, it would get held up.

Again, probably overkill for a public mailing list with less strict patch
reviews, but that is the motivation for asking about the comments api.

I think it is possible to expand the taggingn and comment apis and to
customize our patch ready script thus allowing us to accomplish our needs
without polluting everyone else's needs.

Does that make sense?  Thoughts?


More information about the Patchwork mailing list