<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Niels de Vos <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ndevos@redhat.com" target="_blank">ndevos@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 09:15:21AM +0530, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:<br>
> hi,<br>
> Now that we are doing backports with same Change-Id, we can find the<br>
> patches and their backports both online and in the tree without any extra<br>
> information in the commit message. So shall we stop adding text similar to:<br>
><br>
> > Reviewed-on: <a href="https://review.gluster.org/17414" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://review.gluster.org/<wbr>17414</a><br>
> > Smoke: Gluster Build System <<a href="mailto:jenkins@build.gluster.org">jenkins@build.gluster.org</a>><br>
> > Reviewed-by: Pranith Kumar Karampuri <<a href="mailto:pkarampu@redhat.com">pkarampu@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > Tested-by: Pranith Kumar Karampuri <<a href="mailto:pkarampu@redhat.com">pkarampu@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > NetBSD-regression: NetBSD Build System <<a href="mailto:jenkins@build.gluster.org">jenkins@build.gluster.org</a>><br>
> > Reviewed-by: Amar Tumballi <<a href="mailto:amarts@redhat.com">amarts@redhat.com</a>><br>
> > CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <<a href="mailto:jenkins@build.gluster.org">jenkins@build.gluster.org</a>><br>
> (cherry picked from commit de92c363c95d16966dbcc9d8763fd4<wbr>448dd84d13)<br>
><br>
> in the patches?<br>
><br>
> Do you see any other value from this information that I might be missing?<br>
<br>
</span>I think it is good practise to mention where the backport comes from,<br>
who developed and reviewed the original. At least the commit-id is<br>
important, that way the backport can easily be compared to the original.<br>
git does not know about Change-Ids, but does know commmit-ids :)<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Change-ID captures all this information. You can know the patch in all branches with Change-ID, now that we are following same Change-ID across branches.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
We should try to have all the needed details in the git repository, and<br>
not rely on Gerrit for patch verification/checking. When I'm working on<br>
a patch and wonder why/when something related was changed, I'll use the<br>
local history, and do not want to depend on Gerrit.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Change-ID is mentioned in the commit which is there in the git log, so we can figure out the information without needing internet/gerrit. So that part is not a problem.<br> <br></div><div>All of this information was important to mention earlier because there was no common thing binding all together. With same Change-ID across branches for a patch, it seems unnecessary to mention this information in the commit message.<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Niels<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Pranith<br></div></div>
</div></div>