From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 15:33:12 GMT
Subject: Re: patch submission process, was Re: [PATCH v6 06/16] merge_recursive: abort properly upon errors
Message-ID: <CAPc5daXJzMsJf5K84XBFuQ5=q_OwtYUW2FikZ2QsZWk8fa9jgg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1608031021050.79248@virtualbox>

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:59 AM, Johannes Schindelin
<Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> I disagree, however, with the suggestion to sift through your `pu` branch
> and to somehow replace local branches with the commits found there.

To be more in line with the "e-mailed patch" workflow, I think what I should
do is to send the version I queued with fixups back to the list as follow-up.
Just like reviewers review, the maintainer reviews and queues, the original
author should be able to work in the same workflow, i.e. reading and applying
an improved version of the patch from her mailbox.