| Message ID | 20211208215947.1979470-5-alex@linutronix.de |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [01/29] fetch: add a test for version check where compression changes | expand |
On Wed, 2021-12-08 at 22:59 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> > --- > .../0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch | 3 ++- > ...p.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch | 3 ++- > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch > index e6172ef5aa..5b8fb70639 100644 > --- a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch > +++ b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch > @@ -6,7 +6,8 @@ Subject: [PATCH] buckets/ssl_buckets.c: do not use ERR_GET_FUNC > Upstream removed it in > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/16004 > > -Upstream-Status: Pending > +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019. > +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] > Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> > --- > buckets/ssl_buckets.c | 3 +-- > diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch > index 91640d6044..cf00dbf5ac 100644 > --- a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch > +++ b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch > @@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ ERROR: scons install execution failed. > and the installed paths (including the paths inside libserf*.pc) > look correct > > -Upstream-Status: Pending > +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019 > +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] > > Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> > I'm still not convinced this is the right thing to do. I appreciate what the docs say but I also think we may need to evolve. Let's imagine we do have an "Inactive-Upstream" status for a minute and this patch changes to: Upstream-Status: Inactive-Upstream [last release 2015, last commit 2019] If you now happen to be changing the recipe due to a new release, this is going to trigger some kind of thought/action by seeing that status in that we might now be able to upstream the patches. If it just says "Inappropriate", it won't trigger the response we'd like. We're also going to eventually end up with a whole pile of "Inappropriate" patches, it may be useful to keep an open mind on whether any subdivision of those would be helpful. Does this make sense to anyone else? Cheers, Richard
On 09.12.21 14:45, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Wed, 2021-12-08 at 22:59 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> >> --- >> .../0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch | 3 ++- >> ...p.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch | 3 ++- >> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch >> index e6172ef5aa..5b8fb70639 100644 >> --- a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch >> +++ b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch >> @@ -6,7 +6,8 @@ Subject: [PATCH] buckets/ssl_buckets.c: do not use ERR_GET_FUNC >> Upstream removed it in >> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/16004 >> >> -Upstream-Status: Pending >> +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019. >> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> >> --- >> buckets/ssl_buckets.c | 3 +-- >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch >> index 91640d6044..cf00dbf5ac 100644 >> --- a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch >> +++ b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch >> @@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ ERROR: scons install execution failed. >> and the installed paths (including the paths inside libserf*.pc) >> look correct >> >> -Upstream-Status: Pending >> +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019 >> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> >> > > I'm still not convinced this is the right thing to do. I appreciate what the > docs say but I also think we may need to evolve. > > Let's imagine we do have an "Inactive-Upstream" status for a minute and this > patch changes to: > > Upstream-Status: Inactive-Upstream [last release 2015, last commit 2019] > > If you now happen to be changing the recipe due to a new release, this is going > to trigger some kind of thought/action by seeing that status in that we might > now be able to upstream the patches. If it just says "Inappropriate", it won't > trigger the response we'd like. > > We're also going to eventually end up with a whole pile of "Inappropriate" > patches, it may be useful to keep an open mind on whether any subdivision of > those would be helpful. > > Does this make sense to anyone else? It would makes sense, but then the support and the docs has to backported again, otherwise cherry-picking won't be easy for older releases. But yeah I'm with you that Inappropriate looks odd in this context - still this is stated in the docs, we always refer to, so a doc update needs to come in first IMO > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > View/Reply Online (#159448): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/159448 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/87599630/3647476 > Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [kweihmann@outlook.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >
I think we only have a single doc that needs to be updated first: https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status The question is, how? Presumably, I need to make some kind of official proposal to OE organization, and not just edit the wiki without asking? Alex On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 at 14:56, Konrad Weihmann <kweihmann@outlook.com> wrote: > > > On 09.12.21 14:45, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-12-08 at 22:59 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> > >> --- > >> .../0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch | 3 ++- > >> ...p.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch | 3 ++- > >> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git > a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch > b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch > >> index e6172ef5aa..5b8fb70639 100644 > >> --- > a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch > >> +++ > b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch > >> @@ -6,7 +6,8 @@ Subject: [PATCH] buckets/ssl_buckets.c: do not use > ERR_GET_FUNC > >> Upstream removed it in > >> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/16004 > >> > >> -Upstream-Status: Pending > >> +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019. > >> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] > >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> > >> --- > >> buckets/ssl_buckets.c | 3 +-- > >> diff --git > a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch > b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch > >> index 91640d6044..cf00dbf5ac 100644 > >> --- > a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch > >> +++ > b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch > >> @@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ ERROR: scons install execution failed. > >> and the installed paths (including the paths inside libserf*.pc) > >> look correct > >> > >> -Upstream-Status: Pending > >> +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019 > >> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> > >> > > > > I'm still not convinced this is the right thing to do. I appreciate what > the > > docs say but I also think we may need to evolve. > > > > Let's imagine we do have an "Inactive-Upstream" status for a minute and > this > > patch changes to: > > > > Upstream-Status: Inactive-Upstream [last release 2015, last commit 2019] > > > > If you now happen to be changing the recipe due to a new release, this > is going > > to trigger some kind of thought/action by seeing that status in that we > might > > now be able to upstream the patches. If it just says "Inappropriate", it > won't > > trigger the response we'd like. > > > > We're also going to eventually end up with a whole pile of > "Inappropriate" > > patches, it may be useful to keep an open mind on whether any > subdivision of > > those would be helpful. > > > > Does this make sense to anyone else? > > It would makes sense, but then the support and the docs has to > backported again, otherwise cherry-picking won't be easy for older > releases. But yeah I'm with you that Inappropriate looks odd in this > context - still this is stated in the docs, we always refer to, so a doc > update needs to come in first IMO > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Richard > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > View/Reply Online (#159448): > https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/159448 > > Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/87599630/3647476 > > Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [ > kweihmann@outlook.com] > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > >
I sent a message to oe-architecture. Alex On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 at 15:08, Alexander Kanavin via lists.openembedded.org <alex.kanavin=gmail.com@lists.openembedded.org> wrote: > I think we only have a single doc that needs to be updated first: > > > https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status > > The question is, how? Presumably, I need to make some kind of official > proposal to OE organization, and not just edit the wiki without asking? > > Alex > > On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 at 14:56, Konrad Weihmann <kweihmann@outlook.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On 09.12.21 14:45, Richard Purdie wrote: >> > On Wed, 2021-12-08 at 22:59 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: >> >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> >> >> --- >> >> .../0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch | 3 >> ++- >> >> ...p.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch | 3 >> ++- >> >> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> >> >> diff --git >> a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch >> b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch >> >> index e6172ef5aa..5b8fb70639 100644 >> >> --- >> a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch >> >> +++ >> b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch >> >> @@ -6,7 +6,8 @@ Subject: [PATCH] buckets/ssl_buckets.c: do not use >> ERR_GET_FUNC >> >> Upstream removed it in >> >> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/16004 >> >> >> >> -Upstream-Status: Pending >> >> +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019. >> >> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] >> >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> >> >> --- >> >> buckets/ssl_buckets.c | 3 +-- >> >> diff --git >> a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch >> b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch >> >> index 91640d6044..cf00dbf5ac 100644 >> >> --- >> a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch >> >> +++ >> b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch >> >> @@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ ERROR: scons install execution failed. >> >> and the installed paths (including the paths inside libserf*.pc) >> >> look correct >> >> >> >> -Upstream-Status: Pending >> >> +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019 >> >> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> >> >> >> > >> > I'm still not convinced this is the right thing to do. I appreciate >> what the >> > docs say but I also think we may need to evolve. >> > >> > Let's imagine we do have an "Inactive-Upstream" status for a minute and >> this >> > patch changes to: >> > >> > Upstream-Status: Inactive-Upstream [last release 2015, last commit 2019] >> > >> > If you now happen to be changing the recipe due to a new release, this >> is going >> > to trigger some kind of thought/action by seeing that status in that we >> might >> > now be able to upstream the patches. If it just says "Inappropriate", >> it won't >> > trigger the response we'd like. >> > >> > We're also going to eventually end up with a whole pile of >> "Inappropriate" >> > patches, it may be useful to keep an open mind on whether any >> subdivision of >> > those would be helpful. >> > >> > Does this make sense to anyone else? >> >> It would makes sense, but then the support and the docs has to >> backported again, otherwise cherry-picking won't be easy for older >> releases. But yeah I'm with you that Inappropriate looks odd in this >> context - still this is stated in the docs, we always refer to, so a doc >> update needs to come in first IMO >> >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > Richard >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > View/Reply Online (#159450): > https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/159450 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/87599630/1686489 > Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [ > alex.kanavin@gmail.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > >
diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch index e6172ef5aa..5b8fb70639 100644 --- a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch +++ b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch @@ -6,7 +6,8 @@ Subject: [PATCH] buckets/ssl_buckets.c: do not use ERR_GET_FUNC Upstream removed it in https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/16004 -Upstream-Status: Pending +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019. +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> --- buckets/ssl_buckets.c | 3 +-- diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch index 91640d6044..cf00dbf5ac 100644 --- a/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch +++ b/meta/recipes-support/serf/serf/SConstruct.stop.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch @@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ ERROR: scons install execution failed. and the installed paths (including the paths inside libserf*.pc) look correct -Upstream-Status: Pending +Upstream is defunct: last release in 2015, last commit in 2019 +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [no upstream] Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alex@linutronix.de> --- .../0001-buckets-ssl_buckets.c-do-not-use-ERR_GET_FUNC.patch | 3 ++- ...p.creating.directories.without.sandbox-install.prefix.patch | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)