From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [RFH] How to review patches: Documentation/ReviewingPatches? Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:05:42 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: <200902130045.59395.jnareb@gmail.com> <49952728.2080404@trolltech.com> <7vocx6bu9r.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Marius Storm-Olsen , Jakub Narebski , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 13 12:07:26 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 1LXvsI-0005CP-2K for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:06:26 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751653AbZBMLE5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 06:04:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750911AbZBMLE5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 06:04:57 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:56670 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751473AbZBMLE4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 06:04:56 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2009 11:04:53 -0000 Received: from pacific.mpi-cbg.de (EHLO pacific.mpi-cbg.de) [141.5.10.38] by mail.gmx.net (mp045) with SMTP; 13 Feb 2009 12:04:53 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18pTtV9eNkpxvzyI8itYjnAz+MgNiK5M7+IZSk5JC JFb9eitKaqrQTb X-X-Sender: schindelin@pacific.mpi-cbg.de In-Reply-To: <7vocx6bu9r.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.64 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Marius Storm-Olsen writes: > > > One thing I've wondered about though when sending patches, is how to > > send the fixups. Lets say I have a patch serie with 8 patches, do I > > send the whole serie each time, or do I just send an update to each > > individual patch? Do I attach it to the previous thread, or start a > > new one? > > * Resending the whole series would help, especially if their earlier > round did not hit 'pu'. Note that I chose to do it differently quite a number of times. When I feel that a particular part of the patch series is in deep discussion mode, I will reply to the discussions with updates to that particular patch, often only as an interdiff. When I feel that the result is in a shape that could be applied, or when I feel that people are substantially confused as to what is the current state, I send out a whole updated series. This is to avoid sending v1..v99 of an 18-strong patch series, and basically dominate the volume of the list. > Subsytem maintainers like Paulus for gitk, Shawn for git-gui and bash > completion, Eric for git-svn, and Alexandre for emacs really have helped, ... and Jakub for gitweb, Simon for git-p4, Hannes for mingw.git, the New Zealand gang for cvsserver/cvsimport, not to forget Shawn for fast-import... It is really great to see all that development going on! Ciao, Dscho