Andrew Geissler | 5082cc7 | 2023-09-11 08:41:39 -0400 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | .. SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-2.0-UK |
| 2 | |
| 3 | Contributing Changes to a Component |
| 4 | ************************************ |
| 5 | |
| 6 | Contributions to the Yocto Project and OpenEmbedded are very welcome. |
| 7 | Because the system is extremely configurable and flexible, we recognize |
| 8 | that developers will want to extend, configure or optimize it for their |
| 9 | specific uses. |
| 10 | |
| 11 | .. _ref-why-mailing-lists: |
| 12 | |
| 13 | Contributing through mailing lists --- Why not using web-based workflows? |
| 14 | ========================================================================= |
| 15 | |
| 16 | Both Yocto Project and OpenEmbedded have many key components that are |
| 17 | maintained by patches being submitted on mailing lists. We appreciate this |
| 18 | approach does look a little old fashioned when other workflows are available |
| 19 | through web technology such as GitHub, GitLab and others. Since we are often |
| 20 | asked this question, we’ve decided to document the reasons for using mailing |
| 21 | lists. |
| 22 | |
| 23 | One significant factor is that we value peer review. When a change is proposed |
| 24 | to many of the core pieces of the project, it helps to have many eyes of review |
| 25 | go over them. Whilst there is ultimately one maintainer who needs to make the |
| 26 | final call on accepting or rejecting a patch, the review is made by many eyes |
| 27 | and the exact people reviewing it are likely unknown to the maintainer. It is |
| 28 | often the surprise reviewer that catches the most interesting issues! |
| 29 | |
| 30 | This is in contrast to the "GitHub" style workflow where either just a |
| 31 | maintainer makes that review, or review is specifically requested from |
| 32 | nominated people. We believe there is significant value added to the codebase |
| 33 | by this peer review and that moving away from mailing lists would be to the |
| 34 | detriment of our code. |
| 35 | |
| 36 | We also need to acknowledge that many of our developers are used to this |
| 37 | mailing list workflow and have worked with it for years, with tools and |
| 38 | processes built around it. Changing away from this would result in a loss |
| 39 | of key people from the project, which would again be to its detriment. |
| 40 | |
| 41 | The projects are acutely aware that potential new contributors find the |
| 42 | mailing list approach off-putting and would prefer a web-based GUI. |
| 43 | Since we don’t believe that can work for us, the project is aiming to ensure |
| 44 | `patchwork <https://patchwork.yoctoproject.org/>`__ is available to help track |
| 45 | patch status and also looking at how tooling can provide more feedback to users |
| 46 | about patch status. We are looking at improving tools such as ``patchtest`` to |
| 47 | test user contributions before they hit the mailing lists and also at better |
| 48 | documenting how to use such workflows since we recognise that whilst this was |
| 49 | common knowledge a decade ago, it might not be as familiar now. |
| 50 | |
| 51 | Preparing Changes for Submission |
| 52 | ================================ |
| 53 | |
| 54 | Set up Git |
| 55 | ---------- |
| 56 | |
| 57 | The first thing to do is to install Git packages. Here is an example |
| 58 | on Debian and Ubuntu:: |
| 59 | |
| 60 | sudo aptitude install git-core git-email |
| 61 | |
| 62 | Then, you need to set a name and e-mail address that Git will |
| 63 | use to identify your commits:: |
| 64 | |
| 65 | git config --global user.name "Ada Lovelace" |
| 66 | git config --global user.email "ada.lovelace@gmail.com" |
| 67 | |
| 68 | Clone the Git repository for the component to modify |
| 69 | ---------------------------------------------------- |
| 70 | |
| 71 | After identifying the component to modify as described in the |
| 72 | ":doc:`../contributor-guide/identify-component`" section, clone the |
| 73 | corresponding Git repository. Here is an example for OpenEmbedded-Core:: |
| 74 | |
| 75 | git clone https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core |
| 76 | cd openembedded-core |
| 77 | |
| 78 | Create a new branch |
| 79 | ------------------- |
| 80 | |
| 81 | Then, create a new branch in your local Git repository |
| 82 | for your changes, starting from the reference branch in the upstream |
| 83 | repository (often called ``master``):: |
| 84 | |
| 85 | $ git checkout <ref-branch> |
| 86 | $ git checkout -b my-changes |
| 87 | |
| 88 | If you have completely unrelated sets of changes to submit, you should even |
| 89 | create one branch for each set. |
| 90 | |
| 91 | Implement and commit changes |
| 92 | ---------------------------- |
| 93 | |
| 94 | In each branch, you should group your changes into small, controlled and |
| 95 | isolated ones. Keeping changes small and isolated aids review, makes |
| 96 | merging/rebasing easier and keeps the change history clean should anyone need |
| 97 | to refer to it in future. |
| 98 | |
| 99 | To this purpose, you should create *one Git commit per change*, |
| 100 | corresponding to each of the patches you will eventually submit. |
| 101 | See `further guidance <https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#separate-your-changes>`__ |
| 102 | in the Linux kernel documentation if needed. |
| 103 | |
| 104 | For example, when you intend to add multiple new recipes, each recipe |
| 105 | should be added in a separate commit. For upgrades to existing recipes, |
| 106 | the previous version should usually be deleted as part of the same commit |
| 107 | to add the upgraded version. |
| 108 | |
| 109 | #. *Stage Your Changes:* Stage your changes by using the ``git add`` |
| 110 | command on each file you modified. If you want to stage all the |
| 111 | files you modified, you can even use the ``git add -A`` command. |
| 112 | |
| 113 | #. *Commit Your Changes:* This is when you can create separate commits. For |
| 114 | each commit to create, use the ``git commit -s`` command with the files |
| 115 | or directories you want to include in the commit:: |
| 116 | |
| 117 | $ git commit -s file1 file2 dir1 dir2 ... |
| 118 | |
| 119 | To include **a**\ ll staged files:: |
| 120 | |
| 121 | $ git commit -sa |
| 122 | |
| 123 | - The ``-s`` option of ``git commit`` adds a "Signed-off-by:" line |
| 124 | to your commit message. There is the same requirement for contributing |
| 125 | to the Linux kernel. Adding such a line signifies that you, the |
| 126 | submitter, have agreed to the `Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1 |
| 127 | <https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#sign-your-work-the-developer-s-certificate-of-origin>`__ |
| 128 | as follows: |
| 129 | |
| 130 | .. code-block:: none |
| 131 | |
| 132 | Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1 |
| 133 | |
| 134 | By making a contribution to this project, I certify that: |
| 135 | |
| 136 | (a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I |
| 137 | have the right to submit it under the open source license |
| 138 | indicated in the file; or |
| 139 | |
| 140 | (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best |
| 141 | of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source |
| 142 | license and I have the right under that license to submit that |
| 143 | work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part |
| 144 | by me, under the same open source license (unless I am |
| 145 | permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated |
| 146 | in the file; or |
| 147 | |
| 148 | (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other |
| 149 | person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified |
| 150 | it. |
| 151 | |
| 152 | (d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution |
| 153 | are public and that a record of the contribution (including all |
| 154 | personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is |
| 155 | maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with |
| 156 | this project or the open source license(s) involved. |
| 157 | |
| 158 | - Provide a single-line summary of the change and, if more |
| 159 | explanation is needed, provide more detail in the body of the |
| 160 | commit. This summary is typically viewable in the "shortlist" of |
| 161 | changes. Thus, providing something short and descriptive that |
| 162 | gives the reader a summary of the change is useful when viewing a |
| 163 | list of many commits. You should prefix this short description |
| 164 | with the recipe name (if changing a recipe), or else with the |
| 165 | short form path to the file being changed. |
| 166 | |
| 167 | .. note:: |
| 168 | |
| 169 | To find a suitable prefix for the commit summary, a good idea |
| 170 | is to look for prefixes used in previous commits touching the |
| 171 | same files or directories:: |
| 172 | |
| 173 | git log --oneline <paths> |
| 174 | |
| 175 | - For the body of the commit message, provide detailed information |
| 176 | that describes what you changed, why you made the change, and the |
| 177 | approach you used. It might also be helpful if you mention how you |
| 178 | tested the change. Provide as much detail as you can in the body |
| 179 | of the commit message. |
| 180 | |
| 181 | .. note:: |
| 182 | |
| 183 | If the single line summary is enough to describe a simple |
| 184 | change, the body of the commit message can be left empty. |
| 185 | |
| 186 | - If the change addresses a specific bug or issue that is associated |
| 187 | with a bug-tracking ID, include a reference to that ID in your |
| 188 | detailed description. For example, the Yocto Project uses a |
| 189 | specific convention for bug references --- any commit that addresses |
| 190 | a specific bug should use the following form for the detailed |
| 191 | description. Be sure to use the actual bug-tracking ID from |
| 192 | Bugzilla for bug-id:: |
| 193 | |
| 194 | Fixes [YOCTO #bug-id] |
| 195 | |
| 196 | detailed description of change |
| 197 | |
| 198 | #. *Crediting contributors:* By using the ``git commit --amend`` command, |
| 199 | you can add some tags to the commit description to credit other contributors |
| 200 | to the change: |
| 201 | |
| 202 | - ``Reported-by``: name and email of a person reporting a bug |
| 203 | that your commit is trying to fix. This is a good practice |
| 204 | to encourage people to go on reporting bugs and let them |
| 205 | know that their reports are taken into account. |
| 206 | |
| 207 | - ``Suggested-by``: name and email of a person to credit for the |
| 208 | idea of making the change. |
| 209 | |
| 210 | - ``Tested-by``, ``Reviewed-by``: name and email for people having |
| 211 | tested your changes or reviewed their code. These fields are |
| 212 | usually added by the maintainer accepting a patch, or by |
| 213 | yourself if you submitted your patches to early reviewers, |
| 214 | or are submitting an unmodified patch again as part of a |
| 215 | new iteration of your patch series. |
| 216 | |
| 217 | - ``CC:`` Name and email of people you want to send a copy |
| 218 | of your changes to. This field will be used by ``git send-email``. |
| 219 | |
| 220 | See `more guidance about using such tags |
| 221 | <https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#using-reported-by-tested-by-reviewed-by-suggested-by-and-fixes>`__ |
| 222 | in the Linux kernel documentation. |
| 223 | |
| 224 | Creating Patches |
| 225 | ================ |
| 226 | |
| 227 | Here is the general procedure on how to create patches to be sent through email: |
| 228 | |
| 229 | #. *Describe the Changes in your Branch:* If you have more than one commit |
| 230 | in your branch, it's recommended to provide a cover letter describing |
| 231 | the series of patches you are about to send. |
| 232 | |
| 233 | For this purpose, a good solution is to store the cover letter contents |
| 234 | in the branch itself:: |
| 235 | |
| 236 | git branch --edit-description |
| 237 | |
| 238 | This will open a text editor to fill in the description for your |
| 239 | changes. This description can be updated when necessary and will |
| 240 | be used by Git to create the cover letter together with the patches. |
| 241 | |
| 242 | It is recommended to start this description with a title line which |
| 243 | will serve a the subject line for the cover letter. |
| 244 | |
| 245 | #. *Generate Patches for your Branch:* The ``git format-patch`` command will |
| 246 | generate patch files for each of the commits in your branch. You need |
| 247 | to pass the reference branch your branch starts from. |
| 248 | |
| 249 | If you branch didn't need a description in the previous step:: |
| 250 | |
| 251 | $ git format-patch <ref-branch> |
| 252 | |
| 253 | If you filled a description for your branch, you will want to generate |
| 254 | a cover letter too:: |
| 255 | |
| 256 | $ git format-patch --cover-letter --cover-from-description=auto <ref-branch> |
| 257 | |
| 258 | After the command is run, the current directory contains numbered |
| 259 | ``.patch`` files for the commits in your branch. If you have a cover |
| 260 | letter, it will be in the ``0000-cover-letter.patch``. |
| 261 | |
| 262 | .. note:: |
| 263 | |
| 264 | The ``--cover-from-description=auto`` option makes ``git format-patch`` |
| 265 | use the first paragraph of the branch description as the cover |
| 266 | letter title. Another possibility, which is easier to remember, is to pass |
| 267 | only the ``--cover-letter`` option, but you will have to edit the |
| 268 | subject line manually every time you generate the patches. |
| 269 | |
| 270 | See the `git format-patch manual page <https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch>`__ |
| 271 | for details. |
| 272 | |
| 273 | #. *Review each of the Patch Files:* This final review of the patches |
| 274 | before sending them often allows to view your changes from a different |
| 275 | perspective and discover defects such as typos, spacing issues or lines |
| 276 | or even files that you didn't intend to modify. This review should |
| 277 | include the cover letter patch too. |
| 278 | |
| 279 | If necessary, rework your commits as described in |
| 280 | ":ref:`contributor-guide/submit-changes:taking patch review into account`". |
| 281 | |
Patrick Williams | ac13d5f | 2023-11-24 18:59:46 -0600 | [diff] [blame] | 282 | Validating Patches with Patchtest |
| 283 | ================================= |
| 284 | |
| 285 | ``patchtest`` is available in ``openembedded-core`` as a tool for making |
| 286 | sure that your patches are well-formatted and contain important info for |
| 287 | maintenance purposes, such as ``Signed-off-by`` and ``Upstream-Status`` |
| 288 | tags. Currently, it only supports testing patches for |
| 289 | ``openembedded-core`` branches. To setup, perform the following:: |
| 290 | |
| 291 | pip install -r meta/lib/patchtest/requirements.txt |
| 292 | source oe-init-build-env |
| 293 | bitbake-layers add-layer ../meta-selftest |
| 294 | |
| 295 | Once these steps are complete and you have generated your patch files, |
| 296 | you can run ``patchtest`` like so:: |
| 297 | |
| 298 | patchtest --patch <patch_name> |
| 299 | |
| 300 | Alternatively, if you want ``patchtest`` to iterate over and test |
| 301 | multiple patches stored in a directory, you can use:: |
| 302 | |
| 303 | patchtest --directory <directory_name> |
| 304 | |
| 305 | By default, ``patchtest`` uses its own modules' file paths to determine what |
| 306 | repository and test suite to check patches against. If you wish to test |
| 307 | patches against a repository other than ``openembedded-core`` and/or use |
| 308 | a different set of tests, you can use the ``--repodir`` and ``--testdir`` |
| 309 | flags:: |
| 310 | |
| 311 | patchtest --patch <patch_name> --repodir <path/to/repo> --testdir <path/to/testdir> |
| 312 | |
| 313 | Finally, note that ``patchtest`` is designed to test patches in a standalone |
| 314 | way, so if your patches are meant to apply on top of changes made by |
| 315 | previous patches in a series, it is possible that ``patchtest`` will report |
| 316 | false failures regarding the "merge on head" test. |
| 317 | |
| 318 | Using ``patchtest`` in this manner provides a final check for the overall |
| 319 | quality of your changes before they are submitted for review by the |
| 320 | maintainers. |
| 321 | |
Andrew Geissler | 5082cc7 | 2023-09-11 08:41:39 -0400 | [diff] [blame] | 322 | Sending the Patches via Email |
| 323 | ============================= |
| 324 | |
| 325 | Using Git to Send Patches |
| 326 | ------------------------- |
| 327 | |
| 328 | To submit patches through email, it is very important that you send them |
| 329 | without any whitespace or HTML formatting that either you or your mailer |
| 330 | introduces. The maintainer that receives your patches needs to be able |
| 331 | to save and apply them directly from your emails, using the ``git am`` |
| 332 | command. |
| 333 | |
| 334 | Using the ``git send-email`` command is the only error-proof way of sending |
| 335 | your patches using email since there is no risk of compromising whitespace |
| 336 | in the body of the message, which can occur when you use your own mail |
| 337 | client. It will also properly include your patches as *inline attachments*, |
| 338 | which is not easy to do with standard e-mail clients without breaking lines. |
| 339 | If you used your regular e-mail client and shared your patches as regular |
| 340 | attachments, reviewers wouldn't be able to quote specific sections of your |
| 341 | changes and make comments about them. |
| 342 | |
| 343 | Setting up Git to Send Email |
| 344 | ---------------------------- |
| 345 | |
| 346 | The ``git send-email`` command can send email by using a local or remote |
| 347 | Mail Transport Agent (MTA) such as ``msmtp``, ``sendmail``, or |
| 348 | through a direct SMTP configuration in your Git ``~/.gitconfig`` file. |
| 349 | |
| 350 | Here are the settings for letting ``git send-email`` send e-mail through your |
| 351 | regular STMP server, using a Google Mail account as an example:: |
| 352 | |
| 353 | git config --global sendemail.smtpserver smtp.gmail.com |
| 354 | git config --global sendemail.smtpserverport 587 |
| 355 | git config --global sendemail.smtpencryption tls |
| 356 | git config --global sendemail.smtpuser ada.lovelace@gmail.com |
| 357 | git config --global sendemail.smtppass = XXXXXXXX |
| 358 | |
| 359 | These settings will appear in the ``.gitconfig`` file in your home directory. |
| 360 | |
| 361 | If you neither can use a local MTA nor SMTP, make sure you use an email client |
| 362 | that does not touch the message (turning spaces in tabs, wrapping lines, etc.). |
| 363 | A good mail client to do so is Pine (or Alpine) or Mutt. For more |
| 364 | information about suitable clients, see `Email clients info for Linux |
| 365 | <https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/email-clients.html>`__ |
| 366 | in the Linux kernel sources. |
| 367 | |
| 368 | If you use such clients, just include the patch in the body of your email. |
| 369 | |
| 370 | Finding a Suitable Mailing List |
| 371 | ------------------------------- |
| 372 | |
| 373 | You should send patches to the appropriate mailing list so that they can be |
| 374 | reviewed by the right contributors and merged by the appropriate maintainer. |
| 375 | The specific mailing list you need to use depends on the location of the code |
| 376 | you are changing. |
| 377 | |
| 378 | If people have concerns with any of the patches, they will usually voice |
| 379 | their concern over the mailing list. If patches do not receive any negative |
| 380 | reviews, the maintainer of the affected layer typically takes them, tests them, |
| 381 | and then based on successful testing, merges them. |
| 382 | |
| 383 | In general, each component (e.g. layer) should have a ``README`` file |
| 384 | that indicates where to send the changes and which process to follow. |
| 385 | |
| 386 | The "poky" repository, which is the Yocto Project's reference build |
| 387 | environment, is a hybrid repository that contains several individual |
| 388 | pieces (e.g. BitBake, Metadata, documentation, and so forth) built using |
| 389 | the combo-layer tool. The upstream location used for submitting changes |
| 390 | varies by component: |
| 391 | |
| 392 | - *Core Metadata:* Send your patches to the |
| 393 | :oe_lists:`openembedded-core </g/openembedded-core>` |
| 394 | mailing list. For example, a change to anything under the ``meta`` or |
| 395 | ``scripts`` directories should be sent to this mailing list. |
| 396 | |
| 397 | - *BitBake:* For changes to BitBake (i.e. anything under the |
| 398 | ``bitbake`` directory), send your patches to the |
| 399 | :oe_lists:`bitbake-devel </g/bitbake-devel>` |
| 400 | mailing list. |
| 401 | |
| 402 | - *"meta-\*" trees:* These trees contain Metadata. Use the |
| 403 | :yocto_lists:`poky </g/poky>` mailing list. |
| 404 | |
| 405 | - *Documentation*: For changes to the Yocto Project documentation, use the |
| 406 | :yocto_lists:`docs </g/docs>` mailing list. |
| 407 | |
| 408 | For changes to other layers and tools hosted in the Yocto Project source |
| 409 | repositories (i.e. :yocto_git:`git.yoctoproject.org <>`), use the |
| 410 | :yocto_lists:`yocto </g/yocto/>` general mailing list. |
| 411 | |
| 412 | For changes to other layers hosted in the OpenEmbedded source |
| 413 | repositories (i.e. :oe_git:`git.openembedded.org <>`), use |
| 414 | the :oe_lists:`openembedded-devel </g/openembedded-devel>` |
| 415 | mailing list, unless specified otherwise in the layer's ``README`` file. |
| 416 | |
| 417 | If you intend to submit a new recipe that neither fits into the core Metadata, |
| 418 | nor into :oe_git:`meta-openembedded </meta-openembedded/>`, you should |
| 419 | look for a suitable layer in https://layers.openembedded.org. If similar |
| 420 | recipes can be expected, you may consider :ref:`dev-manual/layers:creating your own layer`. |
| 421 | |
| 422 | If in doubt, please ask on the :yocto_lists:`yocto </g/yocto/>` general mailing list |
| 423 | or on the :oe_lists:`openembedded-devel </g/openembedded-devel>` mailing list. |
| 424 | |
| 425 | Subscribing to the Mailing List |
| 426 | ------------------------------- |
| 427 | |
| 428 | After identifying the right mailing list to use, you will have to subscribe to |
| 429 | it if you haven't done it yet. |
| 430 | |
| 431 | If you attempt to send patches to a list you haven't subscribed to, your email |
| 432 | will be returned as undelivered. |
| 433 | |
| 434 | However, if you don't want to be receive all the messages sent to a mailing list, |
| 435 | you can set your subscription to "no email". You will still be a subscriber able |
| 436 | to send messages, but you won't receive any e-mail. If people reply to your message, |
| 437 | their e-mail clients will default to including your email address in the |
| 438 | conversation anyway. |
| 439 | |
| 440 | Anyway, you'll also be able to access the new messages on mailing list archives, |
| 441 | either through a web browser, or for the lists archived on https://lore.kernelorg, |
| 442 | through an individual newsgroup feed or a git repository. |
| 443 | |
| 444 | Sending Patches via Email |
| 445 | ------------------------- |
| 446 | |
| 447 | At this stage, you are ready to send your patches via email. Here's the |
| 448 | typical usage of ``git send-email``:: |
| 449 | |
| 450 | git send-email --to <mailing-list-address> *.patch |
| 451 | |
| 452 | Then, review each subject line and list of recipients carefully, and then |
| 453 | and then allow the command to send each message. |
| 454 | |
| 455 | You will see that ``git send-email`` will automatically copy the people listed |
| 456 | in any commit tags such as ``Signed-off-by`` or ``Reported-by``. |
| 457 | |
| 458 | In case you are sending patches for :oe_git:`meta-openembedded </meta-openembedded/>` |
| 459 | or any layer other than :oe_git:`openembedded-core </openembedded-core/>`, |
| 460 | please add the appropriate prefix so that it is clear which layer the patch is intended |
| 461 | to be applied to:: |
| 462 | |
| 463 | git send-email --subject-prefix="meta-oe][PATCH" ... |
| 464 | |
| 465 | .. note:: |
| 466 | |
| 467 | It is actually possible to send patches without generating them |
| 468 | first. However, make sure you have reviewed your changes carefully |
| 469 | because ``git send-email`` will just show you the title lines of |
| 470 | each patch. |
| 471 | |
| 472 | Here's a command you can use if you just have one patch in your |
| 473 | branch:: |
| 474 | |
| 475 | git send-email --to <mailing-list-address> -1 |
| 476 | |
| 477 | If you have multiple patches and a cover letter, you can send |
| 478 | patches for all the commits between the reference branch |
| 479 | and the tip of your branch:: |
| 480 | |
| 481 | git send-email --cover-letter --cover-from-description=auto --to <mailing-list-address> -M <ref-branch> |
| 482 | |
| 483 | See the `git send-email manual page <https://git-scm.com/docs/git-send-email>`__ |
| 484 | for details. |
| 485 | |
| 486 | Troubleshooting Email Issues |
| 487 | ---------------------------- |
| 488 | |
| 489 | Fixing your From identity |
| 490 | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
| 491 | |
| 492 | We have a frequent issue with contributors whose patches are received through |
| 493 | a ``From`` field which doesn't match the ``Signed-off-by`` information. Here is |
| 494 | a typical example for people sending from a domain name with :wikipedia:`DMARC`:: |
| 495 | |
| 496 | From: "Linus Torvalds via lists.openembedded.org <linus.torvalds=kernel.org@lists.openembedded.org>" |
| 497 | |
| 498 | This ``From`` field is used by ``git am`` to recreate commits with the right |
| 499 | author name. The following will ensure that your e-mails have an additional |
| 500 | ``From`` field at the beginning of the Email body, and therefore that |
| 501 | maintainers accepting your patches don't have to fix commit author information |
| 502 | manually:: |
| 503 | |
| 504 | git config --global sendemail.from "linus.torvalds@kernel.org" |
| 505 | |
| 506 | The ``sendemail.from`` should match your ``user.email`` setting, |
| 507 | which appears in the ``Signed-off-by`` line of your commits. |
| 508 | |
| 509 | Streamlining git send-email usage |
| 510 | --------------------------------- |
| 511 | |
| 512 | If you want to save time and not be forced to remember the right options to use |
| 513 | with ``git send-email``, you can use Git configuration settings. |
| 514 | |
| 515 | - To set the right mailing list address for a given repository:: |
| 516 | |
| 517 | git config --local sendemail.to openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org |
| 518 | |
| 519 | - If the mailing list requires a subject prefix for the layer |
| 520 | (this only works when the repository only contains one layer):: |
| 521 | |
| 522 | git config --local format.subjectprefix "meta-something][PATCH" |
| 523 | |
| 524 | Using Scripts to Push a Change Upstream and Request a Pull |
| 525 | ========================================================== |
| 526 | |
| 527 | For larger patch series it is preferable to send a pull request which not |
| 528 | only includes the patch but also a pointer to a branch that can be pulled |
| 529 | from. This involves making a local branch for your changes, pushing this |
| 530 | branch to an accessible repository and then using the ``create-pull-request`` |
| 531 | and ``send-pull-request`` scripts from openembedded-core to create and send a |
| 532 | patch series with a link to the branch for review. |
| 533 | |
| 534 | Follow this procedure to push a change to an upstream "contrib" Git |
| 535 | repository once the steps in |
| 536 | ":ref:`contributor-guide/submit-changes:preparing changes for submission`" |
| 537 | have been followed: |
| 538 | |
| 539 | .. note:: |
| 540 | |
| 541 | You can find general Git information on how to push a change upstream |
| 542 | in the |
| 543 | `Git Community Book <https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Distributed-Git-Distributed-Workflows>`__. |
| 544 | |
| 545 | #. *Request Push Access to an "Upstream" Contrib Repository:* Send an email to |
| 546 | ``helpdesk@yoctoproject.org``: |
| 547 | |
| 548 | - Attach your SSH public key which usually named ``id_rsa.pub.``. |
| 549 | If you don't have one generate it by running ``ssh-keygen -t rsa -b 4096 -C "your_email@example.com"``. |
| 550 | |
| 551 | - List the repositories you're planning to contribute to. |
| 552 | |
| 553 | - Include your preferred branch prefix for ``-contrib`` repositories. |
| 554 | |
| 555 | #. *Push Your Commits to the "Contrib" Upstream:* Push your |
| 556 | changes to that repository:: |
| 557 | |
| 558 | $ git push upstream_remote_repo local_branch_name |
| 559 | |
| 560 | For example, suppose you have permissions to push |
| 561 | into the upstream ``meta-intel-contrib`` repository and you are |
| 562 | working in a local branch named `your_name`\ ``/README``. The following |
| 563 | command pushes your local commits to the ``meta-intel-contrib`` |
| 564 | upstream repository and puts the commit in a branch named |
| 565 | `your_name`\ ``/README``:: |
| 566 | |
| 567 | $ git push meta-intel-contrib your_name/README |
| 568 | |
| 569 | #. *Determine Who to Notify:* Determine the maintainer or the mailing |
| 570 | list that you need to notify for the change. |
| 571 | |
| 572 | Before submitting any change, you need to be sure who the maintainer |
| 573 | is or what mailing list that you need to notify. Use either these |
| 574 | methods to find out: |
| 575 | |
| 576 | - *Maintenance File:* Examine the ``maintainers.inc`` file, which is |
| 577 | located in the :term:`Source Directory` at |
| 578 | ``meta/conf/distro/include``, to see who is responsible for code. |
| 579 | |
| 580 | - *Search by File:* Using :ref:`overview-manual/development-environment:git`, you can |
| 581 | enter the following command to bring up a short list of all |
| 582 | commits against a specific file:: |
| 583 | |
| 584 | git shortlog -- filename |
| 585 | |
| 586 | Just provide the name of the file for which you are interested. The |
| 587 | information returned is not ordered by history but does include a |
| 588 | list of everyone who has committed grouped by name. From the list, |
| 589 | you can see who is responsible for the bulk of the changes against |
| 590 | the file. |
| 591 | |
| 592 | - *Find the Mailing List to Use:* See the |
| 593 | ":ref:`contributor-guide/submit-changes:finding a suitable mailing list`" |
| 594 | section above. |
| 595 | |
| 596 | #. *Make a Pull Request:* Notify the maintainer or the mailing list that |
| 597 | you have pushed a change by making a pull request. |
| 598 | |
| 599 | The Yocto Project provides two scripts that conveniently let you |
| 600 | generate and send pull requests to the Yocto Project. These scripts |
| 601 | are ``create-pull-request`` and ``send-pull-request``. You can find |
| 602 | these scripts in the ``scripts`` directory within the |
| 603 | :term:`Source Directory` (e.g. |
| 604 | ``poky/scripts``). |
| 605 | |
| 606 | Using these scripts correctly formats the requests without |
| 607 | introducing any whitespace or HTML formatting. The maintainer that |
| 608 | receives your patches either directly or through the mailing list |
| 609 | needs to be able to save and apply them directly from your emails. |
| 610 | Using these scripts is the preferred method for sending patches. |
| 611 | |
| 612 | First, create the pull request. For example, the following command |
| 613 | runs the script, specifies the upstream repository in the contrib |
| 614 | directory into which you pushed the change, and provides a subject |
| 615 | line in the created patch files:: |
| 616 | |
| 617 | $ poky/scripts/create-pull-request -u meta-intel-contrib -s "Updated Manual Section Reference in README" |
| 618 | |
| 619 | Running this script forms ``*.patch`` files in a folder named |
| 620 | ``pull-``\ `PID` in the current directory. One of the patch files is a |
| 621 | cover letter. |
| 622 | |
| 623 | Before running the ``send-pull-request`` script, you must edit the |
| 624 | cover letter patch to insert information about your change. After |
| 625 | editing the cover letter, send the pull request. For example, the |
| 626 | following command runs the script and specifies the patch directory |
| 627 | and email address. In this example, the email address is a mailing |
| 628 | list:: |
| 629 | |
| 630 | $ poky/scripts/send-pull-request -p ~/meta-intel/pull-10565 -t meta-intel@lists.yoctoproject.org |
| 631 | |
| 632 | You need to follow the prompts as the script is interactive. |
| 633 | |
| 634 | .. note:: |
| 635 | |
| 636 | For help on using these scripts, simply provide the ``-h`` |
| 637 | argument as follows:: |
| 638 | |
| 639 | $ poky/scripts/create-pull-request -h |
| 640 | $ poky/scripts/send-pull-request -h |
| 641 | |
| 642 | Submitting Changes to Stable Release Branches |
| 643 | ============================================= |
| 644 | |
| 645 | The process for proposing changes to a Yocto Project stable branch differs |
| 646 | from the steps described above. Changes to a stable branch must address |
| 647 | identified bugs or CVEs and should be made carefully in order to avoid the |
| 648 | risk of introducing new bugs or breaking backwards compatibility. Typically |
| 649 | bug fixes must already be accepted into the master branch before they can be |
| 650 | backported to a stable branch unless the bug in question does not affect the |
| 651 | master branch or the fix on the master branch is unsuitable for backporting. |
| 652 | |
| 653 | The list of stable branches along with the status and maintainer for each |
| 654 | branch can be obtained from the |
| 655 | :yocto_wiki:`Releases wiki page </Releases>`. |
| 656 | |
| 657 | .. note:: |
| 658 | |
| 659 | Changes will not typically be accepted for branches which are marked as |
| 660 | End-Of-Life (EOL). |
| 661 | |
| 662 | With this in mind, the steps to submit a change for a stable branch are as |
| 663 | follows: |
| 664 | |
| 665 | #. *Identify the bug or CVE to be fixed:* This information should be |
| 666 | collected so that it can be included in your submission. |
| 667 | |
| 668 | See :ref:`dev-manual/vulnerabilities:checking for vulnerabilities` |
| 669 | for details about CVE tracking. |
| 670 | |
| 671 | #. *Check if the fix is already present in the master branch:* This will |
| 672 | result in the most straightforward path into the stable branch for the |
| 673 | fix. |
| 674 | |
| 675 | #. *If the fix is present in the master branch --- submit a backport request |
| 676 | by email:* You should send an email to the relevant stable branch |
| 677 | maintainer and the mailing list with details of the bug or CVE to be |
| 678 | fixed, the commit hash on the master branch that fixes the issue and |
| 679 | the stable branches which you would like this fix to be backported to. |
| 680 | |
| 681 | #. *If the fix is not present in the master branch --- submit the fix to the |
| 682 | master branch first:* This will ensure that the fix passes through the |
| 683 | project's usual patch review and test processes before being accepted. |
| 684 | It will also ensure that bugs are not left unresolved in the master |
| 685 | branch itself. Once the fix is accepted in the master branch a backport |
| 686 | request can be submitted as above. |
| 687 | |
| 688 | #. *If the fix is unsuitable for the master branch --- submit a patch |
| 689 | directly for the stable branch:* This method should be considered as a |
| 690 | last resort. It is typically necessary when the master branch is using |
| 691 | a newer version of the software which includes an upstream fix for the |
| 692 | issue or when the issue has been fixed on the master branch in a way |
| 693 | that introduces backwards incompatible changes. In this case follow the |
| 694 | steps in ":ref:`contributor-guide/submit-changes:preparing changes for submission`" |
| 695 | and in the following sections but modify the subject header of your patch |
| 696 | email to include the name of the stable branch which you are |
| 697 | targetting. This can be done using the ``--subject-prefix`` argument to |
| 698 | ``git format-patch``, for example to submit a patch to the |
| 699 | "&DISTRO_NAME_NO_CAP_MINUS_ONE;" branch use:: |
| 700 | |
| 701 | git format-patch --subject-prefix='&DISTRO_NAME_NO_CAP_MINUS_ONE;][PATCH' ... |
| 702 | |
| 703 | Taking Patch Review into Account |
| 704 | ================================ |
| 705 | |
| 706 | You may get feedback on your submitted patches from other community members |
| 707 | or from the automated patchtest service. If issues are identified in your |
| 708 | patches then it is usually necessary to address these before the patches are |
| 709 | accepted into the project. In this case you should your commits according |
| 710 | to the feedback and submit an updated version to the relevant mailing list. |
| 711 | |
| 712 | In any case, never fix reported issues by fixing them in new commits |
| 713 | on the tip of your branch. Always come up with a new series of commits |
| 714 | without the reported issues. |
| 715 | |
| 716 | .. note:: |
| 717 | |
| 718 | It is a good idea to send a copy to the reviewers who provided feedback |
| 719 | to the previous version of the patch. You can make sure this happens |
| 720 | by adding a ``CC`` tag to the commit description:: |
| 721 | |
| 722 | CC: William Shakespeare <bill@yoctoproject.org> |
| 723 | |
| 724 | A single patch can be amended using ``git commit --amend``, and multiple |
| 725 | patches can be easily reworked and reordered through an interactive Git rebase:: |
| 726 | |
| 727 | git rebase -i <ref-branch> |
| 728 | |
| 729 | See `this tutorial <https://hackernoon.com/beginners-guide-to-interactive-rebasing-346a3f9c3a6d>`__ |
| 730 | for practical guidance about using Git interactive rebasing. |
| 731 | |
| 732 | You should also modify the ``[PATCH]`` tag in the email subject line when |
| 733 | sending the revised patch to mark the new iteration as ``[PATCH v2]``, |
| 734 | ``[PATCH v3]``, etc as appropriate. This can be done by passing the ``-v`` |
| 735 | argument to ``git format-patch`` with a version number:: |
| 736 | |
| 737 | git format-patch -v2 <ref-branch> |
| 738 | |
| 739 | Lastly please ensure that you also test your revised changes. In particular |
| 740 | please don't just edit the patch file written out by ``git format-patch`` and |
| 741 | resend it. |
| 742 | |
| 743 | Tracking the Status of Patches |
| 744 | ============================== |
| 745 | |
| 746 | The Yocto Project uses a `Patchwork instance <https://patchwork.yoctoproject.org/>`__ |
| 747 | to track the status of patches submitted to the various mailing lists and to |
| 748 | support automated patch testing. Each submitted patch is checked for common |
| 749 | mistakes and deviations from the expected patch format and submitters are |
| 750 | notified by ``patchtest`` if such mistakes are found. This process helps to |
| 751 | reduce the burden of patch review on maintainers. |
| 752 | |
| 753 | .. note:: |
| 754 | |
| 755 | This system is imperfect and changes can sometimes get lost in the flow. |
| 756 | Asking about the status of a patch or change is reasonable if the change |
| 757 | has been idle for a while with no feedback. |
| 758 | |
| 759 | If your patches have not had any feedback in a few days, they may have already |
| 760 | been merged. You can run ``git pull`` branch to check this. Note that many if |
| 761 | not most layer maintainers do not send out acknowledgement emails when they |
| 762 | accept patches. Alternatively, if there is no response or merge after a few days |
| 763 | the patch may have been missed or the appropriate reviewers may not currently be |
| 764 | around. It is then perfectly fine to reply to it yourself with a reminder asking |
| 765 | for feedback. |
| 766 | |
| 767 | .. note:: |
| 768 | |
| 769 | Patch reviews for feature and recipe upgrade patches are likely be delayed |
| 770 | during a feature freeze because these types of patches aren't merged during |
| 771 | at that time --- you may have to wait until after the freeze is lifted. |
| 772 | |
| 773 | Maintainers also commonly use ``-next`` branches to test submissions prior to |
| 774 | merging patches. Thus, you can get an idea of the status of a patch based on |
| 775 | whether the patch has been merged into one of these branches. The commonly |
| 776 | used testing branches for OpenEmbedded-Core are as follows: |
| 777 | |
| 778 | - *openembedded-core "master-next" branch:* This branch is part of the |
| 779 | :oe_git:`openembedded-core </openembedded-core/>` repository and contains |
| 780 | proposed changes to the core metadata. |
| 781 | |
| 782 | - *poky "master-next" branch:* This branch is part of the |
| 783 | :yocto_git:`poky </poky/>` repository and combines proposed |
| 784 | changes to BitBake, the core metadata and the poky distro. |
| 785 | |
| 786 | Similarly, stable branches maintained by the project may have corresponding |
| 787 | ``-next`` branches which collect proposed changes. For example, |
| 788 | ``&DISTRO_NAME_NO_CAP;-next`` and ``&DISTRO_NAME_NO_CAP_MINUS_ONE;-next`` |
| 789 | branches in both the "openembdedded-core" and "poky" repositories. |
| 790 | |
| 791 | Other layers may have similar testing branches but there is no formal |
| 792 | requirement or standard for these so please check the documentation for the |
| 793 | layers you are contributing to. |
| 794 | |