Re: [PATCH 00/31] minimal restart of "config-based-hooks"

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 2, 2021, 05:42 UTC
Message-ID: <60b71a37cb4aa_67d0208bf@natae.notmuch>
In-Reply-To: <179668e9-008a-0b70-a193-b0a479ba0146@gmail.com>

Derrick Stolee wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> On 6/1/2021 2:14 PM, Emily Shaffer wrote:
> > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 02:11:02PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> >>
> >> After suggesting[1] an another round that the config-based-hook
> >> topic[2] should take a more incremental approach to reach its end goal
> >> I thought I'd try hacking that up.
> 
> I think sending this complete reorganization of a long-lived topic
> is not helpful, especially because the end-to-end diff is significant.

The end-to-end diff is significant because it's not the full patch series.

Give me pointers to the two branches and I'll get you a patch series on top of Ævar's that gets you *exactly* zero end-to-end diff to Emily's series.

There's many paths to end up with exactly the same code.

I do it all the time.

Show 5 quoted lines

> I've also seen messages as early as January where Ævar mentioned
> wanting to review the series, but not finding the time to do so.
> It is reasonable to expect that contributors attempt such major
> reorganizations according to reviewers feedback, as long as the
> reviewers are timely about delivering that feedback.

The Git project doesn't have deadlines.

Code should be merged when it's ready to be merged, not when it's convenient for $company.

I have patches that have been stuck for 7 years. Why should $company get a fast-path, an exception, or preferential treatment?

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras