[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] scripts: check cc stable mailing list in commit

Yuanhan Liu yuanhan.liu at linux.intel.com
Mon Jan 16 10:51:52 CET 2017

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:54:14PM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 11/21/2016 10:43 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > Add a check for commits fixing a released bug.
> > Such commits are found thanks to scripts/git-log-fixes.sh.
> > They must be sent CC: stable at dpdk.org.
> > In order to avoid forgetting CC, this mail header can be written
> > in the git commit message.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com>
> I think this is useful, thanks for the patch.

Yes, it is. Thanks! (Sorry for late reply; hope it's not too late).

> > +[ -z "$bad" ] || printf "Should CC: stable at dpdk.org\n$bad\n"
> This is good for developer, but since "CC: xx" tags removed when patch
> applied,

Again, I'd suggest to __not__ remove such tag. Firstly, why bother? And
I will talk why this tag should be kept, as a stable tree maintainer.

At the beginning, when people are not used to add "cc: stable" tag, I used
to pick bug fix commits from master by something like: list all bug fixing
patches and pick those that appliable to previous release.

Later, kudos to Thomas, who wrote an handy script (git-log-fixes.sh) to
do both, it indeeded make my life much easier. But it's still not enough.

It lists a lot of patches (206 fix patches, while 728 in total: the
ratio is near 30%):

    $ devtools/git-log-fixes.sh v16.07..v16.11 | wc -l
    $ git rev-list v16.07..v16.11 | wc -l

Thus I dropped few of them, manually, resulting to 130 (still looks like
a big number to me):

    $ git rev-list v16.07..v16.07.2 | wc -l

The policy I would expect is, leave this tag as it is, I then will apply
all of them to a stable branch: I will no longer do the picking job. Instead,
I may just need handle those can't apply cleanly and ask the author to
do backport.

It would be do-able now, as I saw a lot of people are getting used to add
such tag. And even not, I saw those kind committers do that for them.

Besides, if there is already an explicit way, why should we stick on the
implicit way?


> this will generate warnings when run against existing history.
> I don't know what can be done for this.
> Or should we keep CC: tags in commit log perhaps?
> > 

More information about the dev mailing list