Re: Global .git directory

From: Gerhard Wiesinger <lists@wiesinger.com>
Date: May 4, 2010, 06:07 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1005040755360.12746@bbs.intern>
In-Reply-To: <20100504054040.GC13139@goomba>

On Mon, 3 May 2010, Andrew Ruder wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 07:07:08AM +0200, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> I know it all seems nit-picky, but if you want to see your changes make
> it into git.git you're best off making it as EASY AS POSSIBLE for the
> reviewer to take your patch and apply it and be done with it.  This just
> isn't possible without testcases, documentation updates, etc..
> Especially for feature additions (vs bug fixes) you really have to make
> life as simple (and normal) as possible for reviewers, maintainers,
> etc.. After all, it is a lot easier living without a feature than it is
> a documented bug-fix!
>
> Just a random lurker trying to help you out here!

Thnx for your feedback. Will rework some of the parts you mentioned.

I think such a strict process should be valid for final commits to the git repository. But for a first patch ready for discussion I think one shouldn't make such strict process rules. I think we are at the state whether such a patch *might* be accepted and reviewers should look at the content first to have a decision for digging further (e.g. rework some parts of the patch) or for "ok this makes no sense at all". I think this saves time of the reviewers and also my time (I could now make all the formal stuff of the patch you mentioned but when there is something fundamental wrong there e.g in concept all the work was useless when not accepted. I think there should be agreement of the roadmap of a feature and then a focus on formalism to finally commit a pathc. So I'm a fan of discussion and incremental work to minimise useless and typically frustrating effort.)

Ciao, Gerhard

-- http://www.wiesinger.com/