Re: [PATCH v14 04/13] ref-filter: implement an `align` atom

> Hi,
>
> Just a remark on the way iterations are going on with this series: I do
> agree that each version gets better than the previous one, which is
> good. However, I have the feeling that we're turning a simple and easy
> to review series into a monster one (reading "v14 .../13" with a
> non-trivial interdiff is a bit scary for reviewers).
>
> Karthik: I think you could (should?) have splitted the work again.
> You're integrating other people's idea in the series, and sometimes I
> think at some point, a better way would have been: "OK, good idea, I'll
> implement it in on top of this series" (and possibly implement it on top
> before you resend, to make sure that the series is ready to welcome the
> new feature). For example, %(contents:lines=X) is good, but could have
> waited for the next series IMHO. This way, you get a shorter series to
> converge faster (straightforward interdiff for the last iterations), and
> then reviewers can focus on the next, short, series.
>
> The opposite is Zeno paradox kind of series, where you add something new
> every time you get close to getting merged, and you actually never reach
> a stable state ;-).
>
> That said, this particular series was a tough one for this, so I'm not
> even sure my advice would have been applicable ^^.
>