From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 104781F4B4 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:25:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2409455AbgJTUZk (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:25:40 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:50798 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2409452AbgJTUZj (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:25:39 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6DE3FA5DF; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:25:37 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=ko41ZGCe1By82kqQcjMeVWGhYuI=; b=o1Hgze COanf8kZP8umF/C0pgX9N02PfDoX5lCw6kMr4sdxlNAab4jYwpsW2GNXlYgF0MEB h78fEbef/HhpwsRP+1S3xhtkQ0m/gky7t2WhV6c5jkPsOqRJLAZiMJ9rDhtZEZP4 aKl7ACh0BRBZrddpL0cPLvzaDb1k0qGEzyKsM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=jpsldjLE3EKbpfftzcrTjHFTJKg7SkpU oIqP/1tY7qAmp7/vToenrFTSMpi5aJ9uCQbv5oQl4KQdSaeLUycYx9/WkZpfkzN2 h6vOJQa1T52ifjSZA8LLvegGDnWgWPkAaW66PEGJSKGE/FGUhDtACmQroMIFZRwB 6wSLoh8mhMg= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFCECFA5DE; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:25:37 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29026FA5DD; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:25:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Taylor Blau Cc: Charvi Mendiratta , git@vger.kernel.org, christian.couder@gmail.com, phillip.wood123@gmail.com, congdanhqx@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] t7201: put each command on a separate line References: <20201017075455.9660-1-charvi077@gmail.com> <20201020121152.21645-1-charvi077@gmail.com> <20201020201535.GB75186@nand.local> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 13:25:33 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20201020201535.GB75186@nand.local> (Taylor Blau's message of "Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:15:35 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 68B2F334-1312-11EB-94DF-D609E328BF65-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Taylor Blau writes: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 01:13:53PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Charvi Mendiratta writes: >> >> > Modern practice is to avoid multiple commands per line, >> > and instead place each command on its own line. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Charvi Mendiratta >> > --- >> >> This looks good, but I am wondering what happened between v3 and >> v4. > > When I applied this locally, I used this patch as a replacement for the > last patch of v3 [1]. That kept everything passing after each patch. Oh, so this is a replacement for 5/5 and 1-4/5 of v4 are supposed to be identical to those from v3? The difference between [v3 5/5] and this one is a single typofix on the subject line, it seems, though. >> As you've demonstrated through the microproject that you can now >> comfortably be involved in the review discussion, I am tempted to >> suggest that we declare victory at this point and move on, but I >> don't know what the plans are for the other 4 patches (I guess we >> won't miss them that much---the micros are meant to be practice >> targets). > > Yup, ditto. As [v4] single patch won't apply standalone, we cannot quite declare the victory yet. Are [v3 1-5/5] (or [v3 1-4/5] + [v4]) good to the reviewers of the past rounds?