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: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_CSS,URIBL_CSS_A shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BA761F54E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 18:44:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="ks0RGaVe"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231286AbiHJSor (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:44:47 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48184 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230438AbiHJSoq (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:44:46 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (pb-smtp21.pobox.com [173.228.157.53]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DACF3DFE for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 11:44:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4636A1B520D; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:44:45 -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=NsOBA0Dnt1LE92SkOaoE73FVNkBMij1aLOKrwC ONJgo=; b=ks0RGaVe7e7phjFnGtUEF7PnQ08wLkFIdtdTN4NSzYKdVs2olHkNpl EN7Y58jyiqNl9PSY/mApDRhU5rlH85GVCt9Nodwng9bqoZvuEZyHa4tRf8PT7th+ JmHcVfb4ajjlk7DsluOM2M6d88/aU+CQKbbgdx6tbPJWlulWNRsPs= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 402BD1B520C; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:44:45 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.145.39.32]) (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 E3A401B520B; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:44:41 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests: fix incorrect --write-junit-xml code References: <3qn5r283-3232-4s58-8q9s-n67o407nr816@tzk.qr> Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 11:44:40 -0700 In-Reply-To: <3qn5r283-3232-4s58-8q9s-n67o407nr816@tzk.qr> (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 9 Aug 2022 10:42:35 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7EE98600-18DC-11ED-B089-CBA7845BAAA9-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > The funny thing is that you're usually simply not picking up patches that > do not get any reviews, but for these refactorings it is somehow > different, and I do not understand why it needs to be different. Well, I am not sure if encouraging the maintainer to drop patches that are not reviewed is a good overall direction you would want to go in. But let's try that. Less work for me, less disruption to our tree, and the world may be quieter and more pleasant ;-)