<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/page.cgi?id=bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="5.0.6"
          urlbase="https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/"
          
          maintainer="it-coreprojects-helpdesk@linuxfoundation.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>7658</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2015-04-24 10:10:51 +0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>patchwork: provide means of recording additional patch statuses</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2017-12-06 16:48:38 +0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>6</classification_id>
          <classification>Yocto Project Subprojects</classification>
          <product>Patchwork/Patchtest</product>
          <component>Patchwork</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>All</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Multiple</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc></bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard></status_whiteboard>
          <keywords></keywords>
          <priority>High</priority>
          <bug_severity>enhancement</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>2.2 M1</target_milestone>
          <dependson>9130</dependson>
          <blocked>8648</blocked>
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter name="Paul Eggleton">bluelightning</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="Leonardo Sandoval Gonzalez">leonardo.sandoval.gonzalez</assigned_to>
          <cc>belen.barros.pena</cc>
    
    <cc>benjamin.esquivel</cc>
    
    <cc>damien.lespiau</cc>
    
    <cc>jose.a.lamego</cc>
    
    <cc>jose.perez.carranza</cc>
    
    <cc>mhalstead</cc>
    
    <cc>richard.purdie</cc>
          
          
          <cf_os>---</cf_os>
          <cf_regression_type>---</cf_regression_type>
          
          <cf_docchange>No (bug/feature does not impact docs)</cf_docchange>

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>50504</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="Paul Eggleton">bluelightning</who>
    <bug_when>2015-04-24 10:10:51 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>It would be useful to provide some way to see more fine-grained status of patches - e.g. when a patch is being tested / failed testing / passed testing.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>50565</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
    <who name="Paul Eggleton">bluelightning</who>
    <bug_when>2015-04-28 17:35:14 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Apparently it&apos;s possible to add custom statuses, however some of these aren&apos;t mutually exclusive - e.g. it would be nice to see if a patch was tested or not independently of whether it is merged or not, therefore Damien suggests that implementing support for tags might be a better approach.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>54969</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
    <who name="Jose Lamego">jose.a.lamego</who>
    <bug_when>2015-10-05 16:09:59 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>*** Bug 8441 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>54970</commentid>
    <comment_count>3</comment_count>
    <who name="Jose Lamego">jose.a.lamego</who>
    <bug_when>2015-10-05 16:11:57 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Additionally to previous comment, it was requested to evaluate and implement if feasible,the creation of a new patchwork state as a way for tracking patches merged in master-next. Later these patches may be either merged in master or dropped, following the regular patch workflow.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>55766</commentid>
    <comment_count>4</comment_count>
    <who name="Damien Lespiau">damien.lespiau</who>
    <bug_when>2015-10-26 16:13:58 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>As mentioned status and test results are two different things: a patch can be both passing one or more tests and be superseded or accepted.

I tried to summarize the current state of what I&apos;m thinking of:

  https://github.com/dlespiau/patchwork/issues/59</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>56253</commentid>
    <comment_count>5</comment_count>
    <who name="Benjamin Esquivel">benjamin.esquivel</who>
    <bug_when>2015-11-05 23:18:23 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>It would be good to try to target this for 2.1, for completeness of bug 8648.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>56962</commentid>
    <comment_count>6</comment_count>
    <who name="Belen Barros Pena">belen.barros.pena</who>
    <bug_when>2015-12-02 19:51:13 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>We need to work out what the Yocto Project patch workflow will be (which are the statuses a patch goes through and how it moves from one to the next). 

We should not mix patch statuses with test results (which right now I believe are submitted per series, not per patch), and we should not have patches in more than one status.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>57188</commentid>
    <comment_count>7</comment_count>
    <who name="Benjamin Esquivel">benjamin.esquivel</who>
    <bug_when>2015-12-10 21:42:09 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>We should be able to see in M2 what the flows are going to be in the patchwork process so we can know what do we want to see as additional info</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>59696</commentid>
    <comment_count>8</comment_count>
    <who name="Leonardo Sandoval Gonzalez">leonardo.sandoval.gonzalez</who>
    <bug_when>2016-03-03 17:45:41 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Moved to M4. It will resolved once 9130 is done. The new PW instance to be launched includes this feature, but at series level, good enough for the Yocto Project needs.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>59698</commentid>
    <comment_count>9</comment_count>
    <who name="Damien Lespiau">damien.lespiau</who>
    <bug_when>2016-03-03 18:01:24 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>So, actually, Patchwork already supports adding new patch state. One just needs to add a row in the State table and the whole project should pick it up (so for instance, you can set the new state on patches)

So I&apos;m not sure what else is needed there.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>60623</commentid>
    <comment_count>10</comment_count>
    <who name="Benjamin Esquivel">benjamin.esquivel</who>
    <bug_when>2016-03-31 18:21:58 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Agreeing with Damien that the new instance solves this bug, as it is written. It would be missing a bug for _actually_ adding the states.

Can this be closed when the new patchwork instance is up and running?</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>60754</commentid>
    <comment_count>11</comment_count>
    <who name="Leonardo Sandoval Gonzalez">leonardo.sandoval.gonzalez</who>
    <bug_when>2016-04-04 20:32:53 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>&gt; Can this be closed when the new patchwork instance is up and running?

yes. It should be closed as soon as I test this feature on the new PW instance.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>60983</commentid>
    <comment_count>12</comment_count>
    <who name="Leonardo Sandoval Gonzalez">leonardo.sandoval.gonzalez</who>
    <bug_when>2016-04-08 17:26:16 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Michael, As mentioned in the last comments, this feature is already implemented on the new  patchwork instance. Once the instance is ready, please assign it to me again so I can test and resolved it.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>62130</commentid>
    <comment_count>13</comment_count>
    <who name="Michael Halstead">mhalstead</who>
    <bug_when>2016-05-11 21:04:17 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Waiting on Patchwork upgrade.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>63726</commentid>
    <comment_count>14</comment_count>
    <who name="Richard Purdie">richard.purdie</who>
    <bug_when>2016-07-07 15:02:27 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>We&apos;ve upgraded to the new version of patchwork so have this functionality now.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>63800</commentid>
    <comment_count>15</comment_count>
    <who name="Michael Halstead">mhalstead</who>
    <bug_when>2016-07-11 16:53:43 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Reassigning to Leo for testing if needed.</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>