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-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,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 7B2F31F5AE for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:38:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2404266AbgFXPiK (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2020 11:38:10 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:57737 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2404190AbgFXPiJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2020 11:38:09 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B82AC8AFD; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 11:38:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=zutgqS3liobPdi/GDNOQhsnFeOQ=; b=i71E5D hhJDIfWap1SjpGQilZSp7mu2gq/yHssUDbDFJ7PeCenjTllk23myKHN6VKN4AySb sMhUM/mo1rbImWB7cOr7rsA6bWFBoiBbK0g56tVR8cRKgyhxsgntU9RqI9hLjJUG gb5UkNwWlNbkblYpOUSaYEY9c5xuhbG8UKIm8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=gZ61kvAyo/m1/uAS+9fawOvjh/85HYi2 NqD6lRBgGghDCTu80fMaMIMH6aHgBfHNariLTfxAmrjf9DCcVU4R5ypHFwFz/gX1 nrzSUj7A9dNDYH8WxOUE/RvP+ZrHVhBqPlANxM05k81qXPO4VqvLXW0SYDtzOpef goph+oVG6+0= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53F06C8AFC; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 11:38:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 924A4C8AFB; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 11:38:03 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Denton Liu , Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Accommodate for pu having been renamed to seen References: Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 08:38:01 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget's message of "Wed, 24 Jun 2020 14:48:37 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B137CE3E-B630-11EA-9866-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" writes: > Changes since v1: > > * Rebased onto master (no conflicts, so it is safe, and it is more robust > than basing the patches on seen which already contains v1 of these > patches). Thanks, I actually wanted to include it in 'maint', so I'll queue on the same base (no conflicts, so it is safe, and it will be in a maintenance release if we are going to issue one). > * Adjusted the quoting to match > https://lore.kernel.org/git/e250f1bb100aca94c914f1b2d38a3849c2566aea.1592909867.git.liu.denton@gmail.com/ I know I mentioned it and I think the patch to SubmittingPatches does improve by doing `seen` because it matches the way how the nearby `git pull --rebase` is quoted. But I am not sure about the patch to gitworkflows.txt, where the text around the new `seen` mention 'master' and 'next'. I think your v1 was more (locally) consistent. I am on the fence to the change to giteveryday.txt, where `pu` got changed to `seen`; your v1 had "(patches seen by the maintainer)" as an explanation after the `seen`. I guess it is inconsistent to explain only why `seen` is `seen` without doing the same for `next`, so I would say v2 is an improvement over v1. In short, > 1: dc6f971290 ! 1: 35e3dafd6a docs: adjust for the recent rename of `pu` to `seen` > @@ Documentation/SubmittingPatches: their trees themselves. > patches, and will let you know. This works only if you rebase on top > of the branch in which your patch has been merged (i.e. it will not > - tell you if your patch is merged in pu if you rebase on top of > -+ tell you if your patch is merged in 'seen' if you rebase on top of > ++ tell you if your patch is merged in `seen` if you rebase on top of > master). Good. > * Read the Git mailing list, the maintainer regularly posts messages > @@ Documentation/giteveryday.txt: $ git push --follow-tags ko <13> > <2> see which branches haven't been merged into `master` yet. > Likewise for any other integration branches e.g. `maint`, `next` > -and `pu` (potential updates). > -+and `seen` (patches seen by the maintainer). > ++and `seen`. Probably good. > <3> read mails, save ones that are applicable, and save others > that are not quite ready (other mail readers are available). > <4> apply them, interactively, with your sign-offs. > @@ Documentation/gitworkflows.txt: As a given feature goes from experimental to sta > -* 'pu' (proposed updates) is an integration branch for things that are > - not quite ready for inclusion yet (see "Integration Branches" > - below). > -+* 'seen' (patches seen by the maintainer) is an integration branch for > ++* `seen` (patches seen by the maintainer) is an integration branch for Not---'seen' was more consistent relative to the surrounding text. Thanks.