Open Stack

On 2017-05-25 00:33:10 +0000 (+0000), Tristan Cacqueray wrote:
> On May 24, 2017 11:04 pm, James E. Blair wrote:
> [...]
> >How does that sound?
> 
> Thinking about further connections support, could this also works
> for a (theorical) mail based patch cross dependency?

I can imagine wanting something like:

    Depends-On: https://lkml.org/lkml/diff/2017/5/24/668/1

...where zuul will git am what it finds there.

> What's the logic to match the Depends-On syntax to a connection
> driver?

This brings up an additional question: how far can we stretch the
concept of a connection driver, and does it always need to be
something we can report back on in some way? Maybe we want to test a
Gerrit change or GutHub PR which requires a patch from the LKML (as
above) when rebuilding the kernel for a guest, but we don't ever
expect to report back to the LKML about anything. Would having a
generic HTTP(S) driver for things like this make sense?
-- 
Jeremy Stanley