[U-Boot] u-boot release and feature set
Hi Tom,
Every u-boot release announcement has a very high level feature set. I am wondering, if you also maintain detailed feature list per u-boot release?
I can see "Statistics" details per release from https://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle but not the feature set. May be I am looking at wrong place ☹
Regards, Prabhakar
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 06:48:13AM +0000, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote:
Hi Tom,
Every u-boot release announcement has a very high level feature set. I am wondering, if you also maintain detailed feature list per u-boot release?
I can see "Statistics" details per release from https://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle but not the feature set. May be I am looking at wrong place ☹
It's been asked from time to time but I am simply bad about it. I had tried parsing the git logs every -rc to come up with something more detailed, but that didn't last. If more people did signed tags that would provide some useful information for a detailed changelog.
Thanks Tom for responding,
-----Original Message----- From: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 7:28 AM To: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [U-Boot] u-boot release and feature set
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 06:48:13AM +0000, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote:
Hi Tom,
Every u-boot release announcement has a very high level feature set. I am wondering, if you also maintain detailed feature list per u-boot
release?
I can see "Statistics" details per release from https://www.denx.de/wiki/U-
Boot/ReleaseCycle but not the feature set.
May be I am looking at wrong place ☹
It's been asked from time to time but I am simply bad about it. I had tried parsing the git logs every -rc to come up with something more detailed, but that didn't last. If more people did signed tags that would provide some useful information for a detailed changelog.
Feature set is good thing to have per release. It help us in taking decision of upreving u-boot (now or later).
A suggestion, can we ask feature set details in every pull request from sub-maintainers. Or A blog can also be maintained, where sub-maintainer can write feature set per pull request.
Sub-maintainers have better idea what feature they are providing. Feature set can also be published per sub-system (instead of pick and choose).
--pk
On 08/28/2018 08:11 PM, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote:
Thanks Tom for responding,
-----Original Message----- From: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 7:28 AM To: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [U-Boot] u-boot release and feature set
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 06:48:13AM +0000, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote:
Hi Tom,
Every u-boot release announcement has a very high level feature set. I am wondering, if you also maintain detailed feature list per u-boot
release?
I can see "Statistics" details per release from https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.denx....
Boot/ReleaseCycle but not the feature set.
May be I am looking at wrong place ☹
It's been asked from time to time but I am simply bad about it. I had tried parsing the git logs every -rc to come up with something more detailed, but that didn't last. If more people did signed tags that would provide some useful information for a detailed changelog.
Feature set is good thing to have per release. It help us in taking decision of upreving u-boot (now or later).
A suggestion, can we ask feature set details in every pull request from sub-maintainers. Or A blog can also be maintained, where sub-maintainer can write feature set per pull request.
Sub-maintainers have better idea what feature they are providing. Feature set can also be published per sub-system (instead of pick and choose).
I think a short description in pull request can work. Parsing git log doesn't have the weight on each commit. We don't need to know every details of a platform fix, we care more on wider and bigger changes.
York
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 03:46:29PM +0000, York Sun wrote:
On 08/28/2018 08:11 PM, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote:
Thanks Tom for responding,
-----Original Message----- From: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 7:28 AM To: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [U-Boot] u-boot release and feature set
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 06:48:13AM +0000, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote:
Hi Tom,
Every u-boot release announcement has a very high level feature set. I am wondering, if you also maintain detailed feature list per u-boot
release?
I can see "Statistics" details per release from https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.denx....
Boot/ReleaseCycle but not the feature set.
May be I am looking at wrong place ☹
It's been asked from time to time but I am simply bad about it. I had tried parsing the git logs every -rc to come up with something more detailed, but that didn't last. If more people did signed tags that would provide some useful information for a detailed changelog.
Feature set is good thing to have per release. It help us in taking decision of upreving u-boot (now or later).
A suggestion, can we ask feature set details in every pull request from sub-maintainers. Or A blog can also be maintained, where sub-maintainer can write feature set per pull request.
Sub-maintainers have better idea what feature they are providing. Feature set can also be published per sub-system (instead of pick and choose).
I think a short description in pull request can work. Parsing git log doesn't have the weight on each commit. We don't need to know every details of a platform fix, we care more on wider and bigger changes.
I really would appreciate the level of detail Linus' tree gets in signed commit messages being in the U-Boot tree too. No, it's not perfect and it does need someone to make it more digestible, but it's a good starting point. And the people that do send me signed tags do a good job too I think.
On 08/31/2018 08:49 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
I really would appreciate the level of detail Linus' tree gets in signed commit messages being in the U-Boot tree too. No, it's not perfect and it does need someone to make it more digestible, but it's a good starting point. And the people that do send me signed tags do a good job too I think.
If you prefer to have signed tags, we can start to do this. Would you write some guideline on the format, and what information should be included in the annotated tags, how often do we tag?I guess you will use a script to extract information, unless you want to read all of them.
York
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 03:59:59PM +0000, York Sun wrote:
On 08/31/2018 08:49 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
I really would appreciate the level of detail Linus' tree gets in signed commit messages being in the U-Boot tree too. No, it's not perfect and it does need someone to make it more digestible, but it's a good starting point. And the people that do send me signed tags do a good job too I think.
If you prefer to have signed tags, we can start to do this. Would you write some guideline on the format, and what information should be included in the annotated tags, how often do we tag?I guess you will use a script to extract information, unless you want to read all of them.
I will admit that I had to manually find this email link as perhaps my subject at the time was not the best: https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2018-June/330610.html
If information is in the merge commit then it's a lot easier to do anything more on top of that. Thanks!
On 08/31/2018 09:30 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 03:59:59PM +0000, York Sun wrote:
On 08/31/2018 08:49 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
I really would appreciate the level of detail Linus' tree gets in signed commit messages being in the U-Boot tree too. No, it's not perfect and it does need someone to make it more digestible, but it's a good starting point. And the people that do send me signed tags do a good job too I think.
If you prefer to have signed tags, we can start to do this. Would you write some guideline on the format, and what information should be included in the annotated tags, how often do we tag?I guess you will use a script to extract information, unless you want to read all of them.
I will admit that I had to manually find this email link as perhaps my subject at the time was not the best: https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2018-June/330610.html
If information is in the merge commit then it's a lot easier to do anything more on top of that. Thanks!
Tom,
I have been trying to avoid merge commit. I do my best to rebase my tree before requesting a PR so it would be easier for you to merge.
Using signed tag is not an issue. But you still don't have the important changes separated from trivial changes, unless this information is included in the message. For example, if I request a pull with 50 commits, in which 40 commits only deal with default environmental variables. The other 10 commits add a new driver which will be shared for new platforms. I consider the useful information in this PR is the new driver. If this description is in the tag message, it would be easier for you to gather and put into a release note. So having a predefined format will help you to parse the message. I don't think you prefer to read all tags with your eyes.
York
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 04:45:41PM +0000, York Sun wrote:
On 08/31/2018 09:30 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 03:59:59PM +0000, York Sun wrote:
On 08/31/2018 08:49 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
I really would appreciate the level of detail Linus' tree gets in signed commit messages being in the U-Boot tree too. No, it's not perfect and it does need someone to make it more digestible, but it's a good starting point. And the people that do send me signed tags do a good job too I think.
If you prefer to have signed tags, we can start to do this. Would you write some guideline on the format, and what information should be included in the annotated tags, how often do we tag?I guess you will use a script to extract information, unless you want to read all of them.
I will admit that I had to manually find this email link as perhaps my subject at the time was not the best: https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2018-June/330610.html
If information is in the merge commit then it's a lot easier to do anything more on top of that. Thanks!
Tom,
I have been trying to avoid merge commit. I do my best to rebase my tree before requesting a PR so it would be easier for you to merge.
Using signed tag is not an issue. But you still don't have the important changes separated from trivial changes, unless this information is included in the message. For example, if I request a pull with 50 commits, in which 40 commits only deal with default environmental variables. The other 10 commits add a new driver which will be shared for new platforms. I consider the useful information in this PR is the new driver. If this description is in the tag message, it would be easier for you to gather and put into a release note. So having a predefined format will help you to parse the message. I don't think you prefer to read all tags with your eyes.
I appreciate that you want to make this easy on me. So yes, I expect a summary of things and not an itemized list. Looking over the current tree, 26699998e9f4adb8c0ac8b36a2c3089fa8f05283, 188ebc7b594841b6e05ece4690a01517b4136cdd and 61523dde17d1539b8ea361e25909acfdfc465155 are three good example. Honestly, if most of my log on say 'git log --merges v2018.09..v2018.11-rc1' was mostly commits like that I'd be super happy to spend an hour reading and putting that into a summary email.
participants (3)
-
Prabhakar Kushwaha -
Tom Rini -
York Sun