On 2010-03-21 at 20:09:05 [+0100], Niels Reedijk <niels.reedijk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > On 21 March 2010 19:53, Stephan Assmus <superstippi@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 2010-03-21 at 19:25:24 [+0100], Andreas Färber <andreas.faerber@xxxxxx> > > wrote: > >> > >> Am 21.03.2010 um 19:12 schrieb Matt Madia: > >> > >> > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 13:27, Stephan Assmus <superstippi@xxxxxx> > >> > wrote: > >> >> On 2010-03-21 at 16:28:33 [+0100], Andreas Färber > >> >> <andreas.faerber@xxxxxx > >> >> > > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> It's the Trac -> SVN step that's the bigger burden for the > >> >>> developers, I guess, and Patchwork doesn't help with that. > >> >> > >> >> Sounds like you've hit the nail on the head. To add something to the > >> >> discussion, I think an automated Trac -> SVN workflow needs test > >> >> suites as > >> >> well. We would need build bots which need to run the tests with the > >> >> patches > >> >> applied and report regressions. > >> > > >> > Haiku Build-O-Matic is doing ok so far at detecting build breakage. > >> > Though, there's plenty of room for improvement. > >> > >> In an ideal world, BOM would build a temporary dirty branch (trunk + > >> patch(es)) and report back whether it still builds. :) > > > > Exactly. When someone adds a patch to Trac, this process would be > > triggered > > automatically, with an indication besides the attachment that shows the > > result. See <https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35288> for an > > example. > > First things first: I will first write a plugin for Trac that will > allow users to mark attachments as patches and also obsolete them > (much like Bugzilla does). I will also implement a 'patch queue' which > should give a quick overview of what patches are up for review. Wow, that will be pretty cool indeed! Best regards, -Stephan