From: Trieu Huynh <vikingtc4@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2026 18:50:29 GMT
Subject: Re: [GSoC PATCH 00/16] Microproject: avoid suppressing git's exit code
Message-ID: <fgbqroyrek47qqnzyeuhbijonj4y4h24kafwzs6z5om52lxflh@3on4ynvhgxf2>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqbjg5fjls.fsf@gitster.g>

On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 08:00:15AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Trieu Huynh <vikingtc4@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Ack, I missed that point. Could you clarify how many patches or
> > files changed are considered appropriate for the microproject?
> 
> The end product (i.e., a patch that could be applied to my tree) of
> a microproject is not expected to have any value to improve the
> project codebase.  The process has two objectives.  One is to help
> new people experience the end-to-end process of sending their first
> patch, getting it reviewed, engaging in a dialog with the reviewer
> and communicating with others in the community, and polishing and
> resubmitting the patch.  And the other is to help us see how well
> each candidate can work with reviewers and others in the community.
> 
> The size of a microproject submission to allow us achieve the two
> goals may ideally be one-liner change ;-) but it may be a bit too
> hard to gauge the effectiveness of the candidate with such a small
> patch, so in practice the lower bound would be a single file with a
> few hunks, with two paragraphs in the proposed log message.
> 
> And we certainly do not need 16-patch series, each doing very
> similar things and likely to be making similar mistakes at the same
> time.  Interactions with reviewers on just one patch would be
> sufficient for them to learn the community norm, and for us to gauge
> how effective the canidate is, without doing the same or similar
> exchanges for the other 15 patches.
> 
Hello, I appreciate all your kind comments. Thank you.
Drop this series here.

BRs,