RFE: use patchwork to submit a patch

Eric Wong e at 80x24.org
Sat Oct 12 08:23:08 AEDT 2019


Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 10:57:02AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > So other than that minor thing, sounds interesting.  It's hard to
> > determine just how difficult the whole "set up git and send a patch out"
> > process is for people these days given the _huge_ numbers of new
> > contributions we keep getting, and the numerous good tutorials we have
> > created that spell out exactly how to do this.
> > 
> > So you might be "solving" a problem that we don't really have.  It's
> > hard to tell :(
> 
> It is interesting that there are split views on this. The main reason why I
> was thinking about it was because the topic came up a few times already. For
> example, in a conversation last year on ksummit-discuss:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/ksummit-discuss/ECADFF3FD767C149AD96A924E7EA6EAF7C1EAA24@USCULXMSG01.am.sony.com/
> 
> Tim Bird mentioned that Sony developers couldn't send/receive patches
> because their corporate mail server rewrote all links to go through some
> kind of security appliance verification. If you read that thread, what we
> are discussing now is what I suggested we did then -- a web tool that could
> take corporate SMTP servers out of the equation.
> 
> (This is the same reason I generally disagree with Eric Wong about
> preserving SMTP as the primary transmission protocol -- I've heard lots of
> complaints both from kernel developers and especially from people trying to
> contribute to CAF about corporate policies actually making it impossible to
> submit patches -- and no, using a different mail server is not a possibility
> for them because it can be a firing offense under their IT AUP rules.)

I'm not opposed to a webmail interface tailored to kernel hacking
which does stuff like checkpatch.pl and get_maintainer.pl before
sending (similar to your patchwork proposal and
gitgadgetgadget).  That would get around security appliances
but SMTP would still be used in the background.

Or offer full-blown HTTPS webmail + IMAP + SMTP access like any
other webmail provider + checkpatch + get_maintainer helpers.


More information about the Patchwork mailing list