diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'documentation/contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst')
| -rw-r--r-- | documentation/contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst | 754 |
1 files changed, 754 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/documentation/contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst b/documentation/contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..65d8ea5343 --- /dev/null +++ b/documentation/contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst | |||
| @@ -0,0 +1,754 @@ | |||
| 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 | |||
| 282 | Sending the Patches via Email | ||
| 283 | ============================= | ||
| 284 | |||
| 285 | Using Git to Send Patches | ||
| 286 | ------------------------- | ||
| 287 | |||
| 288 | To submit patches through email, it is very important that you send them | ||
| 289 | without any whitespace or HTML formatting that either you or your mailer | ||
| 290 | introduces. The maintainer that receives your patches needs to be able | ||
| 291 | to save and apply them directly from your emails, using the ``git am`` | ||
| 292 | command. | ||
| 293 | |||
| 294 | Using the ``git send-email`` command is the only error-proof way of sending | ||
| 295 | your patches using email since there is no risk of compromising whitespace | ||
| 296 | in the body of the message, which can occur when you use your own mail | ||
| 297 | client. It will also properly include your patches as *inline attachments*, | ||
| 298 | which is not easy to do with standard e-mail clients without breaking lines. | ||
| 299 | If you used your regular e-mail client and shared your patches as regular | ||
| 300 | attachments, reviewers wouldn't be able to quote specific sections of your | ||
| 301 | changes and make comments about them. | ||
| 302 | |||
| 303 | Setting up Git to Send Email | ||
| 304 | ---------------------------- | ||
| 305 | |||
| 306 | The ``git send-email`` command can send email by using a local or remote | ||
| 307 | Mail Transport Agent (MTA) such as ``msmtp``, ``sendmail``, or | ||
| 308 | through a direct SMTP configuration in your Git ``~/.gitconfig`` file. | ||
| 309 | |||
| 310 | Here are the settings for letting ``git send-email`` send e-mail through your | ||
| 311 | regular STMP server, using a Google Mail account as an example:: | ||
| 312 | |||
| 313 | git config --global sendemail.smtpserver smtp.gmail.com | ||
| 314 | git config --global sendemail.smtpserverport 587 | ||
| 315 | git config --global sendemail.smtpencryption tls | ||
| 316 | git config --global sendemail.smtpuser ada.lovelace@gmail.com | ||
| 317 | git config --global sendemail.smtppass = XXXXXXXX | ||
| 318 | |||
| 319 | These settings will appear in the ``.gitconfig`` file in your home directory. | ||
| 320 | |||
| 321 | If you neither can use a local MTA nor SMTP, make sure you use an email client | ||
| 322 | that does not touch the message (turning spaces in tabs, wrapping lines, etc.). | ||
| 323 | A good mail client to do so is Pine (or Alpine) or Mutt. For more | ||
| 324 | information about suitable clients, see `Email clients info for Linux | ||
| 325 | <https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/email-clients.html>`__ | ||
| 326 | in the Linux kernel sources. | ||
| 327 | |||
| 328 | If you use such clients, just include the patch in the body of your email. | ||
| 329 | |||
| 330 | Finding a Suitable Mailing List | ||
| 331 | ------------------------------- | ||
| 332 | |||
| 333 | You should send patches to the appropriate mailing list so that they can be | ||
| 334 | reviewed by the right contributors and merged by the appropriate maintainer. | ||
| 335 | The specific mailing list you need to use depends on the location of the code | ||
| 336 | you are changing. | ||
| 337 | |||
| 338 | If people have concerns with any of the patches, they will usually voice | ||
| 339 | their concern over the mailing list. If patches do not receive any negative | ||
| 340 | reviews, the maintainer of the affected layer typically takes them, tests them, | ||
| 341 | and then based on successful testing, merges them. | ||
| 342 | |||
| 343 | In general, each component (e.g. layer) should have a ``README`` file | ||
| 344 | that indicates where to send the changes and which process to follow. | ||
| 345 | |||
| 346 | The "poky" repository, which is the Yocto Project's reference build | ||
| 347 | environment, is a hybrid repository that contains several individual | ||
| 348 | pieces (e.g. BitBake, Metadata, documentation, and so forth) built using | ||
| 349 | the combo-layer tool. The upstream location used for submitting changes | ||
| 350 | varies by component: | ||
| 351 | |||
| 352 | - *Core Metadata:* Send your patches to the | ||
| 353 | :oe_lists:`openembedded-core </g/openembedded-core>` | ||
| 354 | mailing list. For example, a change to anything under the ``meta`` or | ||
| 355 | ``scripts`` directories should be sent to this mailing list. | ||
| 356 | |||
| 357 | - *BitBake:* For changes to BitBake (i.e. anything under the | ||
| 358 | ``bitbake`` directory), send your patches to the | ||
| 359 | :oe_lists:`bitbake-devel </g/bitbake-devel>` | ||
| 360 | mailing list. | ||
| 361 | |||
| 362 | - *"meta-\*" trees:* These trees contain Metadata. Use the | ||
| 363 | :yocto_lists:`poky </g/poky>` mailing list. | ||
| 364 | |||
| 365 | - *Documentation*: For changes to the Yocto Project documentation, use the | ||
| 366 | :yocto_lists:`docs </g/docs>` mailing list. | ||
| 367 | |||
| 368 | For changes to other layers and tools hosted in the Yocto Project source | ||
| 369 | repositories (i.e. :yocto_git:`git.yoctoproject.org <>`), use the | ||
| 370 | :yocto_lists:`yocto </g/yocto/>` general mailing list. | ||
| 371 | |||
| 372 | For changes to other layers hosted in the OpenEmbedded source | ||
| 373 | repositories (i.e. :oe_git:`git.openembedded.org <>`), use | ||
| 374 | the :oe_lists:`openembedded-devel </g/openembedded-devel>` | ||
| 375 | mailing list, unless specified otherwise in the layer's ``README`` file. | ||
| 376 | |||
| 377 | If you intend to submit a new recipe that neither fits into the core Metadata, | ||
| 378 | nor into :oe_git:`meta-openembedded </meta-openembedded/>`, you should | ||
| 379 | look for a suitable layer in https://layers.openembedded.org. If similar | ||
| 380 | recipes can be expected, you may consider :ref:`dev-manual/common-tasks:creating your own layer`. | ||
| 381 | |||
| 382 | If in doubt, please ask on the :yocto_lists:`yocto </g/yocto/>` general mailing list | ||
| 383 | or on the :oe_lists:`openembedded-devel </g/openembedded-devel>` mailing list. | ||
| 384 | |||
| 385 | Subscribing to the Mailing List | ||
| 386 | ------------------------------- | ||
| 387 | |||
| 388 | After identifying the right mailing list to use, you will have to subscribe to | ||
| 389 | it if you haven't done it yet. | ||
| 390 | |||
| 391 | If you attempt to send patches to a list you haven't subscribed to, your email | ||
| 392 | will be returned as undelivered. | ||
| 393 | |||
| 394 | However, if you don't want to be receive all the messages sent to a mailing list, | ||
| 395 | you can set your subscription to "no email". You will still be a subscriber able | ||
| 396 | to send messages, but you won't receive any e-mail. If people reply to your message, | ||
| 397 | their e-mail clients will default to including your email address in the | ||
| 398 | conversation anyway. | ||
| 399 | |||
| 400 | Anyway, you'll also be able to access the new messages on mailing list archives, | ||
| 401 | either through a web browser, or for the lists archived on https://lore.kernelorg, | ||
| 402 | through an individual newsgroup feed or a git repository. | ||
| 403 | |||
| 404 | Sending Patches via Email | ||
| 405 | ------------------------- | ||
| 406 | |||
| 407 | At this stage, you are ready to send your patches via email. Here's the | ||
| 408 | typical usage of ``git send-email``:: | ||
| 409 | |||
| 410 | git send-email --to <mailing-list-address> *.patch | ||
| 411 | |||
| 412 | Then, review each subject line and list of recipients carefully, and then | ||
| 413 | and then allow the command to send each message. | ||
| 414 | |||
| 415 | You will see that ``git send-email`` will automatically copy the people listed | ||
| 416 | in any commit tags such as ``Signed-off-by`` or ``Reported-by``. | ||
| 417 | |||
| 418 | In case you are sending patches for :oe_git:`meta-openembedded </meta-openembedded/>` | ||
| 419 | or any layer other than :oe_git:`openembedded-core </openembedded-core/>`, | ||
| 420 | please add the appropriate prefix so that it is clear which layer the patch is intended | ||
| 421 | to be applied to:: | ||
| 422 | |||
| 423 | git send-email --subject-prefix="meta-oe][PATCH" ... | ||
| 424 | |||
| 425 | .. note:: | ||
| 426 | |||
| 427 | It is actually possible to send patches without generating them | ||
| 428 | first. However, make sure you have reviewed your changes carefully | ||
| 429 | because ``git send-email`` will just show you the title lines of | ||
| 430 | each patch. | ||
| 431 | |||
| 432 | Here's a command you can use if you just have one patch in your | ||
| 433 | branch:: | ||
| 434 | |||
| 435 | git send-email --to <mailing-list-address> -1 | ||
| 436 | |||
| 437 | If you have multiple patches and a cover letter, you can send | ||
| 438 | patches for all the commits between the reference branch | ||
| 439 | and the tip of your branch:: | ||
| 440 | |||
| 441 | git send-email --cover-letter --cover-from-description=auto --to <mailing-list-address> -M <ref-branch> | ||
| 442 | |||
| 443 | See the `git send-email manual page <https://git-scm.com/docs/git-send-email>`__ | ||
| 444 | for details. | ||
| 445 | |||
| 446 | Troubleshooting Email Issues | ||
| 447 | ---------------------------- | ||
| 448 | |||
| 449 | Fixing your From identity | ||
| 450 | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | ||
| 451 | |||
| 452 | We have a frequent issue with contributors whose patches are received through | ||
| 453 | a ``From`` field which doesn't match the ``Signed-off-by`` information. Here is | ||
| 454 | a typical example for people sending from a domain name with :wikipedia:`DMARC`:: | ||
| 455 | |||
| 456 | From: "Linus Torvalds via lists.openembedded.org <linus.torvalds=kernel.org@lists.openembedded.org>" | ||
| 457 | |||
| 458 | This ``From`` field is used by ``git am`` to recreate commits with the right | ||
| 459 | author name. The following will ensure that your e-mails have an additional | ||
| 460 | ``From`` field at the beginning of the Email body, and therefore that | ||
| 461 | maintainers accepting your patches don't have to fix commit author information | ||
| 462 | manually:: | ||
| 463 | |||
| 464 | git config --global sendemail.from "linus.torvalds@kernel.org" | ||
| 465 | |||
| 466 | The ``sendemail.from`` should match your ``user.email`` setting, | ||
| 467 | which appears in the ``Signed-off-by`` line of your commits. | ||
| 468 | |||
| 469 | Streamlining git send-email usage | ||
| 470 | --------------------------------- | ||
| 471 | |||
| 472 | If you want to save time and not be forced to remember the right options to use | ||
| 473 | with ``git send-email``, you can use Git configuration settings. | ||
| 474 | |||
| 475 | - To set the right mailing list address for a given repository:: | ||
| 476 | |||
| 477 | git config --local sendemail.to openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org | ||
| 478 | |||
| 479 | - If the mailing list requires a subject prefix for the layer | ||
| 480 | (this only works when the repository only contains one layer):: | ||
| 481 | |||
| 482 | git config --local format.subjectprefix "meta-something][PATCH" | ||
| 483 | |||
| 484 | Using Scripts to Push a Change Upstream and Request a Pull | ||
| 485 | ========================================================== | ||
| 486 | |||
| 487 | For larger patch series it is preferable to send a pull request which not | ||
| 488 | only includes the patch but also a pointer to a branch that can be pulled | ||
| 489 | from. This involves making a local branch for your changes, pushing this | ||
| 490 | branch to an accessible repository and then using the ``create-pull-request`` | ||
| 491 | and ``send-pull-request`` scripts from openembedded-core to create and send a | ||
| 492 | patch series with a link to the branch for review. | ||
| 493 | |||
| 494 | Follow this procedure to push a change to an upstream "contrib" Git | ||
| 495 | repository once the steps in | ||
| 496 | ":ref:`contributor-guide/submit-changes:preparing changes for submission`" | ||
| 497 | have been followed: | ||
| 498 | |||
| 499 | .. note:: | ||
| 500 | |||
| 501 | You can find general Git information on how to push a change upstream | ||
| 502 | in the | ||
| 503 | `Git Community Book <https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Distributed-Git-Distributed-Workflows>`__. | ||
| 504 | |||
| 505 | #. *Request Push Access to an "Upstream" Contrib Repository:* Send an email to | ||
| 506 | ``helpdesk@yoctoproject.org``: | ||
| 507 | |||
| 508 | - Attach your SSH public key which usually named ``id_rsa.pub.``. | ||
| 509 | If you don't have one generate it by running ``ssh-keygen -t rsa -b 4096 -C "your_email@example.com"``. | ||
| 510 | |||
| 511 | - List the repositories you're planning to contribute to. | ||
| 512 | |||
| 513 | - Include your preferred branch prefix for ``-contrib`` repositories. | ||
| 514 | |||
| 515 | #. *Push Your Commits to the "Contrib" Upstream:* Push your | ||
| 516 | changes to that repository:: | ||
| 517 | |||
| 518 | $ git push upstream_remote_repo local_branch_name | ||
| 519 | |||
| 520 | For example, suppose you have permissions to push | ||
| 521 | into the upstream ``meta-intel-contrib`` repository and you are | ||
| 522 | working in a local branch named `your_name`\ ``/README``. The following | ||
| 523 | command pushes your local commits to the ``meta-intel-contrib`` | ||
| 524 | upstream repository and puts the commit in a branch named | ||
| 525 | `your_name`\ ``/README``:: | ||
| 526 | |||
| 527 | $ git push meta-intel-contrib your_name/README | ||
| 528 | |||
| 529 | #. *Determine Who to Notify:* Determine the maintainer or the mailing | ||
| 530 | list that you need to notify for the change. | ||
| 531 | |||
| 532 | Before submitting any change, you need to be sure who the maintainer | ||
| 533 | is or what mailing list that you need to notify. Use either these | ||
| 534 | methods to find out: | ||
| 535 | |||
| 536 | - *Maintenance File:* Examine the ``maintainers.inc`` file, which is | ||
| 537 | located in the :term:`Source Directory` at | ||
| 538 | ``meta/conf/distro/include``, to see who is responsible for code. | ||
| 539 | |||
| 540 | - *Search by File:* Using :ref:`overview-manual/development-environment:git`, you can | ||
| 541 | enter the following command to bring up a short list of all | ||
| 542 | commits against a specific file:: | ||
| 543 | |||
| 544 | git shortlog -- filename | ||
| 545 | |||
| 546 | Just provide the name of the file for which you are interested. The | ||
| 547 | information returned is not ordered by history but does include a | ||
| 548 | list of everyone who has committed grouped by name. From the list, | ||
| 549 | you can see who is responsible for the bulk of the changes against | ||
| 550 | the file. | ||
| 551 | |||
| 552 | - *Find the Mailing List to Use:* See the | ||
| 553 | ":ref:`contributor-guide/submit-changes:finding a suitable mailing list`" | ||
| 554 | section above. | ||
| 555 | |||
| 556 | #. *Make a Pull Request:* Notify the maintainer or the mailing list that | ||
| 557 | you have pushed a change by making a pull request. | ||
| 558 | |||
| 559 | The Yocto Project provides two scripts that conveniently let you | ||
| 560 | generate and send pull requests to the Yocto Project. These scripts | ||
| 561 | are ``create-pull-request`` and ``send-pull-request``. You can find | ||
| 562 | these scripts in the ``scripts`` directory within the | ||
| 563 | :term:`Source Directory` (e.g. | ||
| 564 | ``poky/scripts``). | ||
| 565 | |||
| 566 | Using these scripts correctly formats the requests without | ||
| 567 | introducing any whitespace or HTML formatting. The maintainer that | ||
| 568 | receives your patches either directly or through the mailing list | ||
| 569 | needs to be able to save and apply them directly from your emails. | ||
| 570 | Using these scripts is the preferred method for sending patches. | ||
| 571 | |||
| 572 | First, create the pull request. For example, the following command | ||
| 573 | runs the script, specifies the upstream repository in the contrib | ||
| 574 | directory into which you pushed the change, and provides a subject | ||
| 575 | line in the created patch files:: | ||
| 576 | |||
| 577 | $ poky/scripts/create-pull-request -u meta-intel-contrib -s "Updated Manual Section Reference in README" | ||
| 578 | |||
| 579 | Running this script forms ``*.patch`` files in a folder named | ||
| 580 | ``pull-``\ `PID` in the current directory. One of the patch files is a | ||
| 581 | cover letter. | ||
| 582 | |||
| 583 | Before running the ``send-pull-request`` script, you must edit the | ||
| 584 | cover letter patch to insert information about your change. After | ||
| 585 | editing the cover letter, send the pull request. For example, the | ||
| 586 | following command runs the script and specifies the patch directory | ||
| 587 | and email address. In this example, the email address is a mailing | ||
| 588 | list:: | ||
| 589 | |||
| 590 | $ poky/scripts/send-pull-request -p ~/meta-intel/pull-10565 -t meta-intel@lists.yoctoproject.org | ||
| 591 | |||
| 592 | You need to follow the prompts as the script is interactive. | ||
| 593 | |||
| 594 | .. note:: | ||
| 595 | |||
| 596 | For help on using these scripts, simply provide the ``-h`` | ||
| 597 | argument as follows:: | ||
| 598 | |||
| 599 | $ poky/scripts/create-pull-request -h | ||
| 600 | $ poky/scripts/send-pull-request -h | ||
| 601 | |||
| 602 | Submitting Changes to Stable Release Branches | ||
| 603 | ============================================= | ||
| 604 | |||
| 605 | The process for proposing changes to a Yocto Project stable branch differs | ||
| 606 | from the steps described above. Changes to a stable branch must address | ||
| 607 | identified bugs or CVEs and should be made carefully in order to avoid the | ||
| 608 | risk of introducing new bugs or breaking backwards compatibility. Typically | ||
| 609 | bug fixes must already be accepted into the master branch before they can be | ||
| 610 | backported to a stable branch unless the bug in question does not affect the | ||
| 611 | master branch or the fix on the master branch is unsuitable for backporting. | ||
| 612 | |||
| 613 | The list of stable branches along with the status and maintainer for each | ||
| 614 | branch can be obtained from the | ||
| 615 | :yocto_wiki:`Releases wiki page </Releases>`. | ||
| 616 | |||
| 617 | .. note:: | ||
| 618 | |||
| 619 | Changes will not typically be accepted for branches which are marked as | ||
| 620 | End-Of-Life (EOL). | ||
| 621 | |||
| 622 | With this in mind, the steps to submit a change for a stable branch are as | ||
| 623 | follows: | ||
| 624 | |||
| 625 | #. *Identify the bug or CVE to be fixed:* This information should be | ||
| 626 | collected so that it can be included in your submission. | ||
| 627 | |||
| 628 | See :ref:`dev-manual/common-tasks:checking for vulnerabilities` | ||
| 629 | for details about CVE tracking. | ||
| 630 | |||
| 631 | #. *Check if the fix is already present in the master branch:* This will | ||
| 632 | result in the most straightforward path into the stable branch for the | ||
| 633 | fix. | ||
| 634 | |||
| 635 | #. *If the fix is present in the master branch --- submit a backport request | ||
| 636 | by email:* You should send an email to the relevant stable branch | ||
| 637 | maintainer and the mailing list with details of the bug or CVE to be | ||
| 638 | fixed, the commit hash on the master branch that fixes the issue and | ||
| 639 | the stable branches which you would like this fix to be backported to. | ||
| 640 | |||
| 641 | #. *If the fix is not present in the master branch --- submit the fix to the | ||
| 642 | master branch first:* This will ensure that the fix passes through the | ||
| 643 | project's usual patch review and test processes before being accepted. | ||
| 644 | It will also ensure that bugs are not left unresolved in the master | ||
| 645 | branch itself. Once the fix is accepted in the master branch a backport | ||
| 646 | request can be submitted as above. | ||
| 647 | |||
| 648 | #. *If the fix is unsuitable for the master branch --- submit a patch | ||
| 649 | directly for the stable branch:* This method should be considered as a | ||
| 650 | last resort. It is typically necessary when the master branch is using | ||
| 651 | a newer version of the software which includes an upstream fix for the | ||
| 652 | issue or when the issue has been fixed on the master branch in a way | ||
| 653 | that introduces backwards incompatible changes. In this case follow the | ||
| 654 | steps in ":ref:`contributor-guide/submit-changes:preparing changes for submission`" | ||
| 655 | and in the following sections but modify the subject header of your patch | ||
| 656 | email to include the name of the stable branch which you are | ||
| 657 | targetting. This can be done using the ``--subject-prefix`` argument to | ||
| 658 | ``git format-patch``, for example to submit a patch to the | ||
| 659 | "&DISTRO_NAME_NO_CAP_MINUS_ONE;" branch use:: | ||
| 660 | |||
| 661 | git format-patch --subject-prefix='&DISTRO_NAME_NO_CAP_MINUS_ONE;][PATCH' ... | ||
| 662 | |||
| 663 | Taking Patch Review into Account | ||
| 664 | ================================ | ||
| 665 | |||
| 666 | You may get feedback on your submitted patches from other community members | ||
| 667 | or from the automated patchtest service. If issues are identified in your | ||
| 668 | patches then it is usually necessary to address these before the patches are | ||
| 669 | accepted into the project. In this case you should your commits according | ||
| 670 | to the feedback and submit an updated version to the relevant mailing list. | ||
| 671 | |||
| 672 | In any case, never fix reported issues by fixing them in new commits | ||
| 673 | on the tip of your branch. Always come up with a new series of commits | ||
| 674 | without the reported issues. | ||
| 675 | |||
| 676 | .. note:: | ||
| 677 | |||
| 678 | It is a good idea to send a copy to the reviewers who provided feedback | ||
| 679 | to the previous version of the patch. You can make sure this happens | ||
| 680 | by adding a ``CC`` tag to the commit description:: | ||
| 681 | |||
| 682 | CC: William Shakespeare <bill@yoctoproject.org> | ||
| 683 | |||
| 684 | A single patch can be amended using ``git commit --amend``, and multiple | ||
| 685 | patches can be easily reworked and reordered through an interactive Git rebase:: | ||
| 686 | |||
| 687 | git rebase -i <ref-branch> | ||
| 688 | |||
| 689 | See `this tutorial <https://hackernoon.com/beginners-guide-to-interactive-rebasing-346a3f9c3a6d>`__ | ||
| 690 | for practical guidance about using Git interactive rebasing. | ||
| 691 | |||
| 692 | You should also modify the ``[PATCH]`` tag in the email subject line when | ||
| 693 | sending the revised patch to mark the new iteration as ``[PATCH v2]``, | ||
| 694 | ``[PATCH v3]``, etc as appropriate. This can be done by passing the ``-v`` | ||
| 695 | argument to ``git format-patch`` with a version number:: | ||
| 696 | |||
| 697 | git format-patch -v2 <ref-branch> | ||
| 698 | |||
| 699 | Lastly please ensure that you also test your revised changes. In particular | ||
| 700 | please don't just edit the patch file written out by ``git format-patch`` and | ||
| 701 | resend it. | ||
| 702 | |||
| 703 | Tracking the Status of Patches | ||
| 704 | ============================== | ||
| 705 | |||
| 706 | The Yocto Project uses a `Patchwork instance <https://patchwork.yoctoproject.org/>`__ | ||
| 707 | to track the status of patches submitted to the various mailing lists and to | ||
| 708 | support automated patch testing. Each submitted patch is checked for common | ||
| 709 | mistakes and deviations from the expected patch format and submitters are | ||
| 710 | notified by ``patchtest`` if such mistakes are found. This process helps to | ||
| 711 | reduce the burden of patch review on maintainers. | ||
| 712 | |||
| 713 | .. note:: | ||
| 714 | |||
| 715 | This system is imperfect and changes can sometimes get lost in the flow. | ||
| 716 | Asking about the status of a patch or change is reasonable if the change | ||
| 717 | has been idle for a while with no feedback. | ||
| 718 | |||
| 719 | If your patches have not had any feedback in a few days, they may have already | ||
| 720 | been merged. You can run ``git pull`` branch to check this. Note that many if | ||
| 721 | not most layer maintainers do not send out acknowledgement emails when they | ||
| 722 | accept patches. Alternatively, if there is no response or merge after a few days | ||
| 723 | the patch may have been missed or the appropriate reviewers may not currently be | ||
| 724 | around. It is then perfectly fine to reply to it yourself with a reminder asking | ||
| 725 | for feedback. | ||
| 726 | |||
| 727 | .. note:: | ||
| 728 | |||
| 729 | Patch reviews for feature and recipe upgrade patches are likely be delayed | ||
| 730 | during a feature freeze because these types of patches aren't merged during | ||
| 731 | at that time --- you may have to wait until after the freeze is lifted. | ||
| 732 | |||
| 733 | Maintainers also commonly use ``-next`` branches to test submissions prior to | ||
| 734 | merging patches. Thus, you can get an idea of the status of a patch based on | ||
| 735 | whether the patch has been merged into one of these branches. The commonly | ||
| 736 | used testing branches for OpenEmbedded-Core are as follows: | ||
| 737 | |||
| 738 | - *openembedded-core "master-next" branch:* This branch is part of the | ||
| 739 | :oe_git:`openembedded-core </openembedded-core/>` repository and contains | ||
| 740 | proposed changes to the core metadata. | ||
| 741 | |||
| 742 | - *poky "master-next" branch:* This branch is part of the | ||
| 743 | :yocto_git:`poky </poky/>` repository and combines proposed | ||
| 744 | changes to BitBake, the core metadata and the poky distro. | ||
| 745 | |||
| 746 | Similarly, stable branches maintained by the project may have corresponding | ||
| 747 | ``-next`` branches which collect proposed changes. For example, | ||
| 748 | ``&DISTRO_NAME_NO_CAP;-next`` and ``&DISTRO_NAME_NO_CAP_MINUS_ONE;-next`` | ||
| 749 | branches in both the "openembdedded-core" and "poky" repositories. | ||
| 750 | |||
| 751 | Other layers may have similar testing branches but there is no formal | ||
| 752 | requirement or standard for these so please check the documentation for the | ||
| 753 | layers you are contributing to. | ||
| 754 | |||
