Re: [PATCH v4] t7201: put each command on a separate line

From: Charvi Mendiratta <charvi077@gmail.com>
To: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>, git <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Christian Couder" <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
	phillip.wood123@gmail.com,
	"Đoàn Trần Công Danh" <congdanhqx@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] t7201: put each command on a separate line
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:44:47 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPSFM5fQJWk5kqgaCytTZMOQDbKzCDArq0ano9ovAWVpToQAHQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201020203024.GC75186@nand.local>

On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 02:00, Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 01:25:33PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:
> > > When I applied this locally, I used this patch as a replacement for the
> > > last patch of v3 [1]. That kept everything passing after each patch.
> >
> > Oh, so this is a replacement for 5/5 and 1-4/5 of v4 are supposed to
> > be identical to those from v3?  The difference between [v3 5/5] and
> > this one is a single typofix on the subject line, it seems, though.
>
> Yes, at least that's what I interpreted it as (and how I applied it when
> testing). I'd like to hear from the author to make sure.
>

I think I messed up the versions. Its correct that v4 patch was only
replacement for 5/5 (5th patch) of v3, since I need  to fix the typo
error of subject line. Also, other 4 patches (1-4/5) of v3 need to be
remain same in v4.

> (As an aside to the author, I often fall into the trap of thinking that
> it will be easier to send a single replacement patch which will generate
> less email, but--as you can see--it is often more complicated for
> reviewers and the maintainer to decipher what's going on. It's often
> just easier to re-submit the entire series and include in your cover
> letter "this is unchanged from v(n-1) except for ...").
>

Yes I realized this, actually earlier I was doubtful about whether to include
the previous version's correct patches in the new version or not. I might
have confirmed this before sending. But now I will strictly follow this .

Thanks a lot to Junio and Taylor for pointing this out. And in order to
correct this, I will send the new patch series having (v3 1-4/5]+[v4]).

Please correct me, if I missed out anything else.

> > >> As you've demonstrated through the microproject that you can now
> > >> comfortably be involved in the review discussion, I am tempted to
> > >> suggest that we declare victory at this point and move on, but I
> > >> don't know what the plans are for the other 4 patches (I guess we
> > >> won't miss them that much---the micros are meant to be practice
> > >> targets).
> > >
> > > Yup, ditto.
> >
> > As [v4] single patch won't apply standalone, we cannot quite declare
> > the victory yet.  Are [v3 1-5/5] (or [v3 1-4/5] + [v4]) good to the
> > reviewers of the past rounds?
>
> For what it's worth, I'm happy with [v3 1-4/5] + [v4].
>
> Thanks,
> Taylor

Thanks and Regards,
Charvi