[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] doc/patchwork: Document the patchwork states

Stephen Hutchinson qyot27 at gmail.com
Sat Oct 22 19:29:04 EEST 2016

On 10/22/2016 8:25 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 02:12:18PM +0200, Clément Bœsch wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 01:38:47PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael at niedermayer.cc>
>>> ---
>>>  doc/patchwork | 9 +++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>>  create mode 100644 doc/patchwork
>>> diff --git a/doc/patchwork b/doc/patchwork
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..9486e07
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/doc/patchwork
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
>>> +Patchwork states
>>> +
>>> +NEW:               Initial state of new patches
>>> +Accepted:          The patch was pushed to the main master repository
>>> +Rejected:          The patch has been rejected
>>> +Not Applicable:    The patch does not apply to the main master repository
>>> +Superseded:        A newer version of the patch has been posted
>>> +Changes Requested: The patch has been or is under review and changes have been requested
>>> +RFC:               The patch is not intended to be applied but only for comments
>> no "dropped" or "invalid" state? (similar to a self rejected patch)
> Dropped state added
> anything else we need ?
> [...]

The other ones that appear in the list on Patchwork are
'Under Review', 'Deferred', and 'Awaiting Upstream'.

'Under Review' is fairly self-explanatory, but when and why
a patch should be flagged that way (as opposed to simply
remaining as 'New' until it gets committed) isn't.

'Deferred' sounds like either holding off on commit to a
later date or kicking the can to somebody else, and...

'Awaiting Upstream' isn't all that clear about its purpose -
awaiting upstream for what? Review, commit, something else
I've not thought of?  Is this the state that should be used
for patches that are queued up for commit?

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list