Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] maintenance: use packaged systemd units

From: phillip.wood123@gmail.com
To: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>, phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk
Cc: "Max Gautier" <mg@max.gautier.name>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, "Lénaïc Huard" <lenaic@lhuard.fr>,
	"Derrick Stolee" <stolee@gmail.com>,
	"Patrick Steinhardt" <ps@pks.im>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] maintenance: use packaged systemd units
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 10:08:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <82415cdc-6544-4bb2-8080-90b002b1ed1d@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cT1Bz9M5zsB_OSEu-LTTVMBPY6U4vaDHmoHtmoDfH+hpg@mail.gmail.com>

On 24/03/2024 17:03, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 10:55 AM Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 5 - documentation updates
>>     I'm on the fence about having these in a separate commit like the
>>     current patch 5 or updating the documentation when the code is
>>     changed.
> 
> It's generally more reviewer-friendly to bundle documentation change
> into the patch which changes the observable behavior. This way, a
> reviewer has the behavior change fresh in mind and can verify that the
> revised documentation matches the new implementation. Same goes for
> revising tests in the same patch which changes behavior (though, of
> course, revising tests at the same time as the change of behavior is
> also mandatory for maintaining bisectability).

Good point, I think a couple of the documentation changes like 
recommending "systemctl --user edit" were improving the existing docs 
and so they should be in a separate commit at the start of the series. 
The other patches should update the documentation as the code changes.

Thanks

Phillip