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-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 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,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,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 E58AB1F5AE for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 07:32:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230039AbhEJHd4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2021 03:33:56 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:57849 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229684AbhEJHdz (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2021 03:33:55 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3D5CC71B4; Mon, 10 May 2021 03:32:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=jUE4zjgv1PgkTxv1kwLUTvCSiFjEytlMO1fdFm nArsk=; b=kUmSSTo0XRhusGjcQVikyduAsgyXimU21dXwGEUPWkFTNaqOCyPOrR IHgh9JE9d5QX1tr6eJdSU058pvDmJB2Pvc3pekn5wFueJkKKI+e58BEsWdHFUooF vTakK05bgBwPNdNL1ORiMpAnBP5N2z/r/hcq/pEkfVYBTbYWzVMdY= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB125C71B3; Mon, 10 May 2021 03:32:50 -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-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 54582C71B2; Mon, 10 May 2021 03:32:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Firmin Martin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Johannes Schindelin , Erik Faye-Lund , Denton Liu Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/8] format-patch: confirmation whenever patches exist References: <878s4ngta2.fsf@Inspiron.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 16:32:49 +0900 In-Reply-To: <878s4ngta2.fsf@Inspiron.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> (Firmin Martin's message of "Mon, 10 May 2021 05:30:13 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: EC8EC870-B161-11EB-BE73-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Firmin Martin writes: >> True. But if we require confirmation before overwriting patches, >> that would be overall worsening the end-user experience, I am >> afraid. In a 5-patch series with a cover-letter that was formatted, >> proofread, corrected with "rebase -i" and then re-formatted, unless >> you rephrased the titles of the patches, you'd get prompted once for >> the cover letter (which *IS* valuable) and five-times for patches >> (which is annoying). > This is true for this patch, but the semantics changed after the patch > #3. I really should have squashed them together to not create > confusion. Sorry about that. No, please keep them separate. What we can do to avoid confusion like I showed is to make a note on the earlier one, saying "with this the user experience looks like this, which may be suboptimal for such and such reasons, but in a later step it will be improved in this and that way".