Re: [PATCH 2/2] transport-helper: update remote helper namespace

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

There are many reasons not to queue _everything_ ever posted to the list on 'pu', and they are almost always not a deliberate rejection.

The maintainer may have thought he is not the best person to judge changes to the area the patch touches, and may be expecting further comments from others, but haven't said "Comments?" and waiting for them to say something without being asked. Or the maintainer may have judged that it is likely to result in wasted work if he queues that version of the patch, fixing trivial nits himself, only to see a reroll arrive before the day's integration cycle finishes (which makes him run the cycle again). Or the maintainer may have been busy tending to other topics. Or the maintainer may have pushed the patch down the queue for any of the above reasons to deal with it later, and after having tended to others' topics, may have forgotten about that patch.

Do I need to go on?

For this particular case, I think that was exactly the reason why it is not in 'pu' today. I actually did not remember the reason when you asked above, until I read the above "I said I'll update".

One major reason why I queue a patch that is clearly not ready for 'next' is because I do not want to forget about the topic and not because I want to keep the particular version of the patch. I do so especially when contributor is unlikely to come back soon. If you said you would come back soon, I do not even have to judge if it is "clearly not ready" or "it is good enough" for next, and I have to remember one less thing. The more I can put in "this will come back so I do not have to do anything" bin, not in the "queue it as-is for now, because it is likely that it won't be rerolled soon and I'll forget about it" bin, the easier for me and we as the development process as a whole can scale better.