From: Eli Barzilay Date: Wed, 05 May 2010 21:28:01 GMT Subject: Re: Re-submitting patches Message-ID: <19425.58081.592591.319107@winooski.ccs.neu.edu> In-Reply-To: <20100505212437.GA26487@progeny.tock> On May 5, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > 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!