From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lars Schneider Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] git-p4: add optional type specifier to gitConfig reader Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 09:49:16 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1441298148-63885-1-git-send-email-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <1441298148-63885-2-git-send-email-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <55E8A5C2.9090500@diamand.org> <6FAAE139-9010-4C68-AA97-2739E9A09564@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Luke Diamand , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Sep 04 09:49:23 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZXlkQ-0006xw-GF for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 09:49:22 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756693AbbIDHtT convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Sep 2015 03:49:19 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com ([209.85.212.175]:37269 "EHLO mail-wi0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755456AbbIDHtS convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Sep 2015 03:49:18 -0400 Received: by wicfx3 with SMTP id fx3so8712469wic.0 for ; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 00:49:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=+FLbCLSyIT1aYmJ3yV5xLxMumkpDDqfNpRkhmgV5ajs=; b=0Eh15JyF0O8CInBQcS0ar8YdU9/qaHh6ZKLOUh1Gj31L28sZeJjyUjVe7+06ajmBN8 LDpCVTuUFn/ZzCLKNM1W3LDkIVjleNjHDfTrAtTGJ4lX4U32GGcAcg3QryuRiX+P/TuH CuyjH8hHfaX6nDKE3fjS1RR/XCJoqSccKgyTGy5VM9SgIInKJKUCmf6sXcN5LdJgf3aL weUfHm4ez9NA2jnK/qRqebiBBzEY8UU8LJIPpH9MRNuK3+pH2RGCpJPhXJtnbbVcJQYo TaA35wwyJXKYDmvu9rlGke9L4fWbioMojEHN5fg6of0CFcYYedRTs8+yB/Njwdf4R5mg Ka+A== X-Received: by 10.180.211.11 with SMTP id my11mr4581373wic.51.1441352957282; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 00:49:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slxbook3.fritz.box (dslb-094-223-088-076.094.223.pools.vodafone-ip.de. [94.223.88.76]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id fz5sm2713744wic.18.2015.09.04.00.49.16 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Sep 2015 00:49:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 03 Sep 2015, at 23:31, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Lars Schneider writes: >=20 >> In case I agree with a reviewer. What is the more appropriate action= ? >> A response like the one above or a new role that includes the change >> right away? I don=92t want to spam the list with lots of tiny change= s=85 >=20 > Responding to review comment like you did with "will do" is > perfectly fine. >=20 > When you do think you will (eventually) want to send an updated > patch, there are things other than "will do" that you can say. "I > understand what you said, but I am not sure how exactly to make this > better. Perhaps lend me a help?" is good, too. >=20 > An explanation, followed by "ok?", in response to "it is unclear > what you are doing here" (commenting on code) or to "I cannot > understand what this is trying to say" (commenting on log message), > is problematic because your intention becomes ambiguous. >=20 > The reviewers are rarely saying "I do not understand; educate me." > but "I do not understand, and it is likely many others don't, too. > Make it more easily understandable." is what they mean. >=20 > An explanation with "ok?" can be taken as a sign that you mistook > the review comment as "educate me". >=20 > What I meant was .... Do you think commenting the code here > with the above description is good enough? Or do you think > of a way to restructure the code itself to be more self > evident? >=20 > or something like that may be a way to avoid the ambiguity. >=20 > Thanks. Thank you for the explanation! :-)