Re: [PATCH 1/2] refs: Add for_each_worktree_ref for iterating over all worktree HEADs

From: Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>
Date: May 18, 2017, 00:07 UTC
Message-ID: <20170518000735.GD185461@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACpkpx=usSnEBPPPppdeaM+HUNc06ZuN3mrfN4Nemspn96K9dQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 05/17, Manish Goregaokar wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> Oh, btw, refs.c needs an #include "worktree.h" to work; I didn't get a
> chance to test this after rebasing onto the maint branch.
> 
> (There's also another fix it needs to have no warnings, but that's not
> going to affect building). I have this fixed locally, but I'll wait
> for the rest of the review before pushing them up.
> -Manish Goregaokar

Just as an fyi, its usually fine to send out a path RFC (request for comments) or WIP (Work in Progress) which compiles with warnings (or maybe not at all) and which doesn't pass all tests. If you do that just make sure to indicate as such.

Though if you are sending out a patch which you want to be seriously reviewed and ultimately merged then the best practice is to ensure that it compiles without warnings and that all tests pass. I'm definitely guilty of this occasionally (no one's perfect!) but I'm just hoping to provide you with some of the expectations we have.

I'm assuming you're newer to the community, so Welcome! Take a load off and stay a while :)

-- 
Brandon Williams