Apply Patchseries Script

[Aaron Conole]

Patrick Robb <probb at iol.unh.edu> writes:

> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 4:22 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net> wrote:
>
>  27/09/2023 18:31, Patrick Robb:
>
>  > 2. Do not apply and run if the series is an RFC series
>
>  Not sure about this requirement.
>  What is the problem in running tests on RFC?
>
> I see that currently ovsrobot and UNH Lab have rules saying don't test on RFC series, and Loongson and Intel do test on
> RFC series. I'm guessing the thinking was something like "RFC patches are at least one stage away from merge, and
> probably do not represent the final state of the patch, so CI testing is not very valuable." On the other hand, I'm sure in
> many cases getting that early feedback, even for an RFC, is helpful to developers. I'll bring it up in the CI testing
> meeting tomorrow and see if any of the CI testing people have an opinion. Anyways, I think all labs should have the
> same policy, be it testing or not testing on RFC patches. 

We do currently skip running RFCs as well.  IIRC they were eating into
our timing budget on Travis, and we never bothered to re-evaluate after
the switch to github actions.  I think it would be good to discuss it.

> Thanks for the feedback.