Re: [PATCH] MyFirstContribution: refrain from self-iterating too much

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jan 22, 2023, 16:01 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqcz76tv6d.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <20230122071156.367jwwt3d5txvkl4@tb-raspi4>

Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

>> +Of course, you still may spot mistakes and rooms for improvements
>> +after you sent your initial patch.
>
> I can't resist the question: After outlining what not to do and why,
> could there be a hint what to do ?

There already is and it is the theme of the next paragraph.

People on the list do not have to see your patch immediately after you wrote it. Instead of seeing the initial version right now that is followed by a series of "oops, I like this verison better than the previous one" rerolls over 2 days, reviewers would appreciate if a single more polished version came 2 days late and that version was the only one they need to review.

Wait, re-read what you wrote, fix the problems you find locally, all without sending it out until you find no more "oops, that would not work" and simple typos. Sleep on it.

Of course, people are not perfect so they may still find issues after they sent their patches out.

Show 6 quoted lines

> It may be, that the author justs spots a simple typo, or there may
> be more heavier changes to be done.
>
> Should the author just respond to her/his patch as a reviewer does ?
> Like:
> Ops, there is a "typax", I should have written "typo".

Follow that with the same "I will fix this typo when I reroll, but I'll wait for reviews from others" as the other one, and it would be the second best thing you could do (the best is to avoid having to say that, of course).

> Or:
> Re-reading my own stuff, I think that things could have been done
> in a way like this....
> Lets wait for more comments before I send out a new version.

Again, very good.