From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marius Storm-Olsen Subject: Re: [RFH] How to review patches: Documentation/ReviewingPatches? Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:54:16 +0100 Message-ID: <49952728.2080404@trolltech.com> References: <200902130045.59395.jnareb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigAABF5A2A43087722AD19A2CE" Cc: Jakub Narebski , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 13 08:55:55 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LXstt-0003Mp-2S for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:55:53 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753455AbZBMHy0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:54:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752634AbZBMHyZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:54:25 -0500 Received: from hoat.troll.no ([62.70.27.150]:39722 "EHLO hoat.troll.no" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752470AbZBMHyY (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:54:24 -0500 Received: from hoat.troll.no (tedur.troll.no [62.70.27.154]) by hoat.troll.no (Postfix) with SMTP id C845220ED3; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:54:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from [172.24.90.95] (unknown [172.24.90.95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hoat.troll.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9EA9209F5; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:54:16 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20081209 Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.19 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAFVBMVEXU1NTAwMABAQGsrKyE hIQwMDAEBAS8hGUfAAACQUlEQVQ4jV2TS47cMAxEKSDZW1CfwMB4PYLkrKchsveJRR2gEen+R0hR 9vziBmahhyqSRQ4NfF1FmIv3dH4usNAGoFprBVguQJmZ1nX0XiHgEukTCK3TairiZeXcVGzmZIoU 3738pehdVbiU9KFgMQWeZ1fpHZDfRS4rPb3eQVaZChGx4ikt5GDkAZQ2KKohzjklno4+iJpVhxka ZjSpasJ4gdGaEQMWTMjRa5uTqza0XDJjzhIdzGTMrqoopimoIPCKZtVOq265MAXpMLXycmVl2Y8C oE1FkT/faKauOjYoHJyOxHfvixjowvI0xZJsKykubgLYzuJMdBO+L86TjxfQ9hz9jpSudbnXXzRm tor5i3MUONpOfARAhlWbzWF7OhP2eSeEW9HUBNiHOxUM8HLWHhUAj3NZNsdqRZpNA+DJ+XlX+Qc9 Z4ZjHX8LRUzgTBBef84NQoCMOcS0+BMsj3klbTzRri03ugXr9em1GfgzDAyEn4J3fvFI5YwdTrYu 1ntAY1h5ysM2OMGm+cBOocCXHisAHu2PagnLghoG2krz8bzsA4fj7KxCGk+63jt+DDCtYjbFNkHD nRwpRqsQYx5WYzsbm/eBfn0I4TbOGvMWqhQAiEDzNs4apumCI0x2OyHtY7uAlZff/sanbH9+AGT1 KOEmUlJISdYPgEgehw+cTZEf6xeFyoEjCPgv+A62KhW3EOy9PL7WmCBMRWmfYN0OqW9krzl/Ay91 75HMqfDtP8UFckFUX2rwrm/kTVB2gH+hdu4avZVCuAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigAABF5A2A43087722AD19A2CE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Johannes Schindelin said the following on 13.02.2009 01:08: > There is another reason why I do not want any ReviewingPatches: > reviewing is already such a tedious process; let's not make it > harder by forcing a potential reviewer to sift through a document > (the same could be said about SubmittingPatches; IMHO it just > repeats what common sense would do anyway when imitating existing > code). One thing I've wondered about though when sending patches, is how to=20 send the fixups. Lets say I have a patch serie with 8 patches, do I=20 send the whole serie each time, or do I just send an update to each=20 individual patch? Do I attach it to the previous thread, or start a=20 new one? I couldn't really draw any conclusion by watching the list, since all=20 methods are used. However, I'd like to do what's easiest for the=20 reviewers and maintainers. Probably a new series each time is easiest=20 for Junio to parse and apply, without single updates deep in a thread.=20 However, that might also be considered a tad 'spamming' of the list? Though, ignoring mail threads is fairly trivial with threading MUAs=20 ;-) (I've used "Mark thread as read" quite a bit lately :-) Any opinions, preferably from those that review a lot, and apply=20 patches directly from the mailing list? Maybe this could qualify as a=20 section in Documentation/SubmittingPatches? --=20 =2Emarius [@trolltech.com] 'if you know what you're doing, it's not research' --------------enigAABF5A2A43087722AD19A2CE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) iD8DBQFJlScoKzzXl/njVP8RAjgKAKD5USfXuNa+r6y3H2ep24dcTCKmegCgnqCG E21LnDJAL/hjjJclOeTW0o0= =Hhun -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigAABF5A2A43087722AD19A2CE--