| Summary: | patchtest: Patches not sent as reply to their respective series/root message should trigger a warning message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Yocto Project Subprojects] Patchwork/Patchtest | Reporter: | Jose Lamego <jose.a.lamego> |
| Component: | Patchtest Testsuite | Assignee: | Leonardo Sandoval Gonzalez <leonardo.sandoval.gonzalez> |
| Status: | RESOLVED INVALID | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | Medium | CC: | bluelightning, patrick.ohly |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | 2.5 | ||
| Hardware: | x86 | ||
| OS: | Multiple | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| OS type for building Yocto: | --- | Type of Regression: | --- |
| Verified: | Documentation change: | No (bug/feature does not impact docs) | |
|
Description
Jose Lamego
2016-11-28 18:11:42 UTC
(In reply to comment #0) > Patchtest should have a test to detect patches that may belong to a series > (due to the "x/n" prefix in subject), but that were not sent as a reply to > any root message. This should not cause the test to fail, but to trigger a > warning. > > An example of such a patch email is in > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2016-November/ > 129348.html Not sure if we way to trigger a warning/fail on this case. People usually send their n revision without indicating the in-reply-to message-id of the n-1 revision. Also, for the moment, patchtest just trigger failures, not warnings, but at the end if patchwork is sending a email to the mailing list on behalf of patchtest, we want actions to be done from the developer, so I am not sure if failures/warnings would make sense. Paul, thoughts about it? comment 1 basically resumes the decision to mark it as invalid. (In reply to comment #2) > comment 1 basically resumes the decision to mark it as invalid. s/resumes/summarizes |