On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 10:52:32AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 10:11:07AM -0400, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
Sasha, it is a little insulting to me to have my manual backports ignored while you pull in extra unnecessary changes to make them apply
Appologies: this is a case where some things falls through the cracks between Greg and myself. Let me explain...
Greg is usually picking up patches from the mailing list. I have the annoying bot (which you might have seen) that tests backports folks send over, but in reality I would rarely apply a backport someone sent over (even if only so we won't step on each other's toes).
On the other hand, I have some automation in place that after a few days, it combs through the FAILED: mails that Greg sends out and will attempt to automatically resolve conflicts by bringing in dependencies and build testing the code.
Maybe that automation could look to see if a patch has already been sent to the FAILED thread? Greg's instructions tell people to use '--in-reply-to' with the FAILED message ID so it would probably cover the vast majority of cases of manually backport.
I promise I haven't "manually" ignored your backports :)
Sorry, I did not mean for that to sound as harsh and accusatory as it was and I appreciate the additional clarification around the process so that it can potentially be improved :) thanks for all the work you and Greg do.
Cheers, Nathan