Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Accommodate for pu having been renamed to seen

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jun 30, 2020, 16:03 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqpn9gee2l.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2006291606060.56@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 7 quoted lines

>> You could have just told me that the fixup queued on 'seen' looks
>> good to you and squash it in the first step instead to save one
>> roundtrip, but replacing with a new set of three patches is not so
>> bad, either ;-)
>
> To be honest, the GitGitGadget-based workflow makes it quicker for me to
> just submit a new iteration.

I do not mind seeing a new iteration that gives easier time for others to comment on the version that is closer to the final than the previous round. The offer was only for contributors who find it easier to just say "yeah, I am happy with that change" than submitting a new round.

> In fact, I did not even see your fixup until I read your mail.

This I actually would mind a bit more. The reason why I publish 'seen' is to make it easier for authors of individual topics how their work would play with other topics in flight, and it diminishes the value of it if contributors do not pay attention to what is queued there. I expect contributors to fetch and look at what is queued in origin/seen.

There may be evil merges that reveal subtle interactions between topics, some of which may involve the topic an author may care about. There may be fixups for problems that were not found during review but only found during the integration process. I try to communicate these back on the list when possible, but the thing is, a day does not have sufficient number of minutes for me to always do so.

Thanks.