Re: Re-submitting patches

From: Eli Barzilay <eli@barzilay.org>
Date: May 5, 2010, 21:28 UTC
Message-ID: <19425.58081.592591.319107@winooski.ccs.neu.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20100505212437.GA26487@progeny.tock>

On May  5, Jonathan Nieder wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Hi Eli,
> 
> Eli Barzilay wrote:
> > On May  5, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> 
> >> (*sigh*)  That's correct, I fixed this, but improperly remade the
> >> patch.
> >
> > Is there some convention for sending a fixed patch?
> 
> With a small patch like this one, you can just send the fixed patch
> as a reply to the thread.  Putting “[PATCH v2]” in the subject would
> make it clear that this is the newer and better version.

Ah -- it's the "v2" that I missed, thanks.

> With larger patches, doing that too often can overload people.
> My preferred solution: describe the changes as soon as you want, but
> then take some time to polish them before resubmitting.  This gives
> people time to breathe. ;-)

Yes, I'd be much more careful if this was not a quick thing. (BTW, it would be nice if there is a way to get various publishing commands like `format-patch' and `pull' to spit out some warning if there are uncommitted changes -- that would have prevented me from sending the bogus one.)

-- 
          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!