Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] fast-import: tighten parsing of paths

[Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>]

On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 5:19 PM Thalia Archibald <thalia@archibald.dev> wrote:
> On Apr 1, 2024, at 02:02, Thalia Archibald wrote:
> >> fast-import has subtle differences in how it parses file paths between each
> >> occurrence of <path> in the grammar. Many errors are suppressed or not checked,
> >> which could lead to silent data corruption. A particularly bad case is when a
> >> front-end sent escapes that Git doesn't recognize (e.g., hex escapes are not
> >> supported), it would be treated as literal bytes instead of a quoted string.
> >>
> >> Bring path parsing into line with the documented behavior and improve
> >> documentation to fill in missing details.
> >
> > Thanks for the review, Patrick. I've made several changes, which I think address
> > your feedback. What's the protocol for adding `Reviewed-by`? Since I don't know
> > whether I, you, or Junio add it, I've refrained from attaching your name to
> > these patches.
>
> Hello! Friendly ping here. It’s been a week since the last emails for this patch
> set, so I’d like to check in on the status.

Pinging is certainly the correct thing to do.

Regarding `Reviewed-by:`: that trailer doesn't mean that someone
merely read and commented on a patch. Instead, it's explicitly _given_
by a reviewer to indicate that the reviewer has thoroughly reviewed
the patch set and is confident that it is ready to be merged into the
project, at which point Junio typically adds the `Reviewed-by:`.

> As a new contributor to the project, I don’t yet have a full view of the
> contribution flow, aside from what I’ve read. I suspect the latency is because I
> may not have cc’d all the area experts. (When I sent v1, I used separate Cc
> lines in send-email --compose, but it dropped all but the last. After Patrick
> reviewed it, I figured I could leave the cc list as-is for v2, assuming I’d get
> another review.) I’ve now cc’d everyone listed by contrib/contacts, as well as
> the maintainer. For anyone not a part of the earlier discussion, the latest
> version is at https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover.1711960552.git.thalia@archibald.dev/.
> If that’s not the problem, I’d be keen to know what I could do better.

Lack of response may be due to the series being overlooked, or it
could mean that nobody has any particular interest in the changes
(which is not to say that there is anything wrong with the changes),
or that people are simply busy elsewhere. It could also mean that this
reroll is good enough and reviewers have nothing else to add. So,
cc'ing potentially interested people makes sense.

> I have several more patch sets in the works, that I’ve held back on sending
> until this one is finished, in case I’ve been doing something wrong. I want to
> move forward. Thank you for your time.

If the additional patch sets are unrelated to this patch set, then I
don't see a reason to hold them back. Feel free to send them. Even if
they are related to this patch set, you may still want to send them.
After all, doing so may get the ball rolling again on this patch set.