Re: [PATCH v7] builtin/clone.c: add --reject-shallow option

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 25, 2021, 20:31 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqa6qrug9u.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <pull.865.v7.git.1616670558261.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>

"Li Linchao via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

> ...
> This patch offers a new option '--reject-shallow' that can reject to
> clone a shallow repository.
>
> Signed-off-by: lilinchao <lilinchao@oschina.cn>
>
> Reviewed-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
> Reviewed-by: Junio C Hamano<gitster@pobox.com>
> Reviewed-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan<jonathantanmy@google.com>

The Reviewed-by trailer means something quite different from what you seem to think here. It is only given by the reviewers to the patch when they carefully reviewed and agrees what is in the patch. The patch authors are in no position to add it, unless they are explicitly told by reviewers that "this patch now can have my Reviewed-by:" or some equivalent.

The (ideal) flow of events is

 0. The author comes up with an idea and writes a patch.

 1. The patch is sent to the list and Cc'ed to people who may be
    familiar with the area the patch touches.  For second and
    subsequent iterations, those who gave review comments to the
    previous iterations are also good people to Cc to.

 2. People give comments as reponses to the patch.

    (a) some may be happy with the iteration of the patch they
        reviewed, and may say "Thanks for contributing, this is now
        Reviewed-by: me".  For second and subsequent iterations,
        they may say "This was improved relative to the previous
        iteration, and it still looks good and you have my
        Reviewed-by:".

    (b) some may give constructive criticism, alternatives,
        enhancements, or outright "not a good idea, don't do this
        because ...".

    (c) some may just act as cheerleaders.

 3. The author thinks about the review comments and also may find
    improvement him/herself.

    (a) There may need an update to the patch.  If the patch has
        changed since the previous version in any way, ignore
        Reviewed-by: received in 2-(a).  When a significant help was
        given to update the patch, you may add "Helped-by:" trailer
        to credit the person's contribution.

        Your own "Signed-off-by:" appears the last in the trailers
        (i.e. "this iteration of the patch was written with help
        from these people, and then I am signing it off just before
        sending it out").

	Go back to 1. and repeat as many times as it takes.
    
    (b) There may not be a need for any update to the patch.  Only
        add the Reviewed-by: received in 2-(a) and otherwise do not
        change anything.  Your own "Signed-off-by:" appears the last
        in the trailers.  Send it to the list and to the maintainer
        (me).

 4. The maintainer applies the patch, unless there is no other
    comments received on that supposedly-the-final version sent in
    3-(b), but a late review comment may make us realize that it was
    premature, in which case we may go back to 3-(a).