Re: My patches

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 12, 2013, 22:33 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s0wWiedCXX-bes5ad6S67pWtyQPcs97y8UQzyUsanMr9Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5247B8D59AAE41F3A0D8BF165D2C2BAE@PhilipOakley>

On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org> wrote:

> From: "Felipe Contreras" <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2013 8:24 AM

Show 5 quoted lines

>> Clearly, a lot of my patches have not been reviewed properly, so even
>> though they are technically correct, and would benefit users, some have
>> specifically been requested by them, and at least one would
>> significantly improve Git's user interface...
>

> Given you have put a lot of work into your 16 patch series, is there any
> particular order, or grouping that would help their review.

I ordered them in order of importance, and chance of being merged. For example, the first patch series 'branch: improve verbose option' is relatively simple, it improves things significantly, and other developers have already argued this is the way to go. The last one 'sha1-name: refactor get_sha1() parsing' doesn't have much of a chance of being merged, it's quite complicated, there isn't any particular change that is visible to the users, and there isn't probably much interest.

Show 7 quoted lines

> With so many patches to consider one (the reviewer(s)) gains another task of
> simply trying to prioritise the patches (usually one can take big decisions
> by simply remebering who's series one was interested in).
>
> I expect the clean-ups and 'trivials's' can be managed separately from the
> 'improvements', which would again be separate from the "satging" and "Ruby"
> philosophical discussions.

Maybe, but the trivial patches have a higher chance of being merged than 'Massive improvents to rebase and cherry-pick' or 'Support for Ruby', that's why I put them first.

Show 5 quoted lines

>>   they are going nowhere.
>
> I wouldn't expect 100% success. Every now and again one hears of the "here's
> some patches I've had in my tree for a while" that probably had the same
> early frustrations - they just feel worse the more you produce.

Yeah, I'm aware of that, I have contributed to lots of open source projects. However, we are not talking about a couple of patches that now and again get lost, we are talking about 160 patches, some which have gone through several (even ten) iterations. I think that is different.

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras