git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH 0/5] Re-roll rr/revert-cherry-pick

From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date
Dec 8, 2011, 18:41 UTC
Message-ID
<7vpqfyj47m.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To
<20111207081734.GG11737@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net>
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
Show 17 quoted lines
> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
>
>> This is a re-roll of rr/revert-cherry-pick, with Junio's suggestions
>> ($gname/186365) implemented.
>
> Thanks for this.  I am worried that some of my comments in previous
> reviews (especially about change descriptions) were not addressed,
> which could mean one of a few things:
>
>  - you didn't notice them
>  - they were wrong
>  - you noticed them and they were describing real problems, but it
>    wasn't worth the time to fix them
>
> Fine.  But I would like to know which case they fell into, so I can
> learn in order to do a better job reviewing the future and know my
> time is well spent.

Another thing I often notice after raising an issue during a review (this is not limited to Ram) is that I do so in the form of a question "why is this function done this way?" expecting either "ah, doing it that way instead is simpler and easier to read" or "because of such and such, which you may have missed. after all this is a tricky codepath with this and that constraints" as a response. The former should and often does result in an update of the code in the re-rolled series, but the latter often results in a frustrating nothing in a re-roll, when the fact that a reviewer needed to ask the question was a sure sign that the code needs explanation either in the log message or in-code comment.

> The series makes various changes, all essentially good, which leaves
> me all the more motivated to figure out how to get this sort of thing
> in smoothly without making life difficult for people in the future
> tracking down regressions.

I looked the series over with your comments and tend to agree with many of them. Perhaps I should wait for another round before picking it up again (I've already dropped the old series I kept before 1.7.8).

Previous: Jonathan Nieder
Message 23 of 23 in “Re-roll rr/revert-cherry-pick”
  1. 0/5 Re-roll rr/revert-cherry-pickRamkumar Ramachandra, Dec 7, 2011
  2. 1/5 revert: free msg in format_todo()Ramkumar Ramachandra, Dec 7, 2011
  3. Jonathan NiederDec 7, 2011
  4. 2/5 revert: make commit subjects in insn sheet optionalRamkumar Ramachandra, Dec 7, 2011
  5. Jonathan NiederDec 7, 2011
  6. Ramkumar RamachandraDec 9, 2011
  7. Ramkumar RamachandraDec 9, 2011
  8. Jonathan NiederDec 9, 2011
  9. Ramkumar RamachandraDec 9, 2011
  10. Jonathan NiederDec 9, 2011
  11. Ramkumar RamachandraDec 9, 2011
  12. 3/5 revert: simplify getting commit subject in format_todo()Ramkumar Ramachandra, Dec 7, 2011
  13. Jonathan NiederDec 7, 2011
  14. 4/5 revert: allow mixed pick and revert instructionsRamkumar Ramachandra, Dec 7, 2011
  15. Jonathan NiederDec 7, 2011
  16. Ramkumar RamachandraDec 9, 2011
  17. 5/5 revert: simplify communicating command-line argumentsRamkumar Ramachandra, Dec 7, 2011
  18. Jonathan NiederDec 7, 2011
  19. Jonathan NiederDec 7, 2011
  20. Ramkumar RamachandraDec 7, 2011
  21. Jonathan NiederDec 7, 2011
  22. Jonathan NiederDec 7, 2011
  23. Junio C HamanoDec 8, 2011

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.