Re: [PATCH 0/2] git-svn: fixes for intermittent SIGPIPE

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 23, 2012, 14:44 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqvckqld7q.fsf@junio.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANiYKX5RNb3YXhGWXzpfDz+XK1PM6zyN=zrDKk3_4StCu2ukzg@mail.gmail.com>

Roman Kagan <rkagan@mail.ru> writes:

> IIUC the series was approved by Eric.  What do I need to do now to
> have it reviewed for accepting into the master tree?

I see this:

        Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 21:11:20 +0000
        From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
        Message-ID: <20120410211120.GA27555@dcvr.yhbt.net>

        Roman Kagan <rkagan@mail.ru> wrote:
        > +		my $signew = POSIX::SigSet->new(SIGINT, SIGHUP, SIGTERM,
        > +			SIGALRM, SIGPIPE, SIGUSR1, SIGUSR2);

        Considering your 2/2 patch, can we remove SIGPIPE here?
        Otherwise, I think this series is good.  Thanks!

What usually happens after such an intial round of review is for you to think about the comments like this one given during the review, and either submit a patch updated accordingly, or discuss why your original is better than the suggested update, and then the reviewer responds to it, and repeat the process until everybody involved in the discussion accepts the outcome.

Then the patch will hit my 'next' branch (or my 'master' branch, for subsystems like git-svn where the area expert, i.e. Eric in this case, knows much better than myself) after that.

In short, as far as I can see, the ball is still in your court.

Thanks for a reminder, though.