From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16BC11F545 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2023 15:25:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=sasl header.b=MC+N6csN; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229961AbjGaPZZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2023 11:25:25 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42802 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229545AbjGaPZY (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2023 11:25:24 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D17B1702 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2023 08:25:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18561A99F1; Mon, 31 Jul 2023 11:25:20 -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=K0VbIpH3NMxOD+ZPECOxZvqCl2Wh69k+nu08pi iEBl0=; b=MC+N6csN8MHlbiVr1ABX86icA9TVdnQNAhpQq94CP90frbNK6JJDsg EqpF/N2WsvtdFLwjtAbKOdOagp4Id9LJ6kwIa8pmURqfnX8c/de9cNdxLJvbZujd kedhaa+Bi7CwTg2k4M0Yd49/7fq7ZljHj+p4nWRv+QnTSjRAgIerQ= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B711A99F0; Mon, 31 Jul 2023 11:25:20 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.168.215.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CD3E1A99EF; Mon, 31 Jul 2023 11:25:20 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jacob Abel Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Linus Arver , Torsten =?utf-8?Q?B=C3=B6gershausen?= Subject: Re: Re* [PATCH v4] MyFirstContribution: refrain from self-iterating too much References: <20230123175804.2bkcr7yawyz5fhkb@tb-raspi4> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 08:25:19 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Jacob Abel's message of "Sat, 29 Jul 2023 02:12:05 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 75E0B4BA-2FB6-11EE-BB5B-C65BE52EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jacob Abel writes: > Maybe something along the lines of "wait 24 hours after any discussion > regarding the current revision has settled before publishing the next > revision" would be a good guideline even if it's not included in this > patch? Perhaps. Usually after an iteration or two of a topic, it will become clear who are available and interested in the topic, and "Wait and give them enough time to respond to what you write" would become the most appropriate guideline at that point. But for new contributors and for more experienced ones alike, the interest level from others is much harder to assess for the first iteration, until everybody on the list has chance to notice and get interested in the topic. So "wait at least for 24 hours after posting the first iteration" would be a good guideline for those who do not know who on the list are the likely candidates to be interested and know how quick their responses usually have historically been. A mistake I have often seen by new folks is to send their v2 soon after they get a single minor response to their v1, without saying why they are sending v2 at the time (e.g. "I am only fixing the typo that was pointed out"). It takes much shorter time to come up with a response to point out a typo or two in the proposed log message than giving a deeper analysis, which may only come after a few iterations of such trivial changes.