From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9593202A0 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 17:07:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754845AbdKARHe (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2017 13:07:34 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:55059 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752395AbdKARHd (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2017 13:07:33 -0400 Received: from virtualbox ([37.201.193.73]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LeRKD-1dLy5b3Od3-00q8ps; Wed, 01 Nov 2017 18:07:26 +0100 Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 18:07:25 +0100 (CET) From: Johannes Schindelin X-X-Sender: virtualbox@virtualbox To: Jonathan Nieder cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] mingw: introduce a way to avoid std handle inheritance In-Reply-To: <20171031180933.styinoik4npmd53b@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> Message-ID: References: <20171030205522.hur26cumwusk7wwa@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> <20171031180933.styinoik4npmd53b@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.1 (DEB 209 2017-03-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:gyE+CmpErLv9eM/vLCRqWXbMLsCeRqzfzon+Ig4+zGxvtckFukb 9Ls00+fcTHT7SLoVn3fqkLkNGhlX+xTaNbLQYgVMP328Cfpsh3T6WiLHqc0mRM2iP5T9kXC SEcb8h52m0mCM5F4jgkzy3SeKc5TTmn4Y/IkVjr46iJyYN5iTkAU058ROWZX1gctw309+aZ Bcs0jUfceNyPP0eRwJ4GA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:SvvqUf1VsGE=:3YgUFAONWky43sYxYoD6x0 ZhoCYJk4KW4AGoeheI0abG4foMef8kPrWMpI/E6f0n8x5sCjc7oD3akGpD/3rjvI/6c6k0RCT UFd0s2lSl6QnNUJSB/nJYxTLA27kmIqHDLf4abRav7FQCfX0XGxlvqIB7L6ZG1+zhl2wiNLh7 H5qzWU6W/1JtE7WQZuPNhUFkHr3PYT/hcoNEtR4Iv+sOOivPN8VtrzarG5iAMWYMZ+XzeVz0V i4iu1q8wrVuRLhoHLuuUEQkGDGNE8TAua9brsaGuQBFuODt0Iwb/pndZ/3i5KB1riH2v2PEBA vtyb73rozX3xsYif5NlzGUNllF5dmsIDjEUxuDe8Co5ab+nIel6pEralX03tW6W19Ukqdr+BG GJobL9DH93g/5vIejOIu3rcSmj2gDZX6DsQMRlOq8+t/7N7f8REXmeP7kVAd7sYyl4YNaxuwx RuhMO/gqj0T90RQOUZwYsHXxdOaOAefMOotPhvOPdK/kmse2wj4kALzbigF3JC09Qfh/26ZIZ CgoZHBnMWI+xIc2EpeIFbFBiwagQjqMv1KVpH3Vk3EN4dDDPSfDGPeDTCb+NkNuaheL1CzaS5 +xY3MkwsaG1lg/oDsSsfmmMLWMMqwAOYM5SMdrlpnNc/h9wGQYTWmvkrceqdIWAZurQ7pzKxR ZHpNpTm40uNdJyAV/lbb6cwHT8Mq9J/GU27hHpoXKcbFtblx5AovjrH/uhhnKoojcpRw38S7G AMmYiiqrBRsNRFNatV2QIVrFDgXAcaDw97Bo0a1u72x0dMGEjg3RFS+q/S+ICHeATK/p6Ri0t 9W1J+QI5cGSpx1QUWBgokywG6Lr4AYNoJilI3OIMWFJj4EnRKxgnpLiGDh/dfElo7srHA6l Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Jonahtan, On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Oct 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > >> Can this rationale go in the commit messages? > > > > I thought I had done exactly that in 1/3... > > Okay, I'll be more specific. This cover letter includes some > information about the rationale and motivation for the series. That's > great: it makes reading the patches easier. But TBH I'd rather that > it hadn't included that information at all, since if it said "see > patch 1/3 for rationale" then I could save the trouble of reading the > same information twice. Alas, I am the exact opposite. You see, I am seriously short on time, and if the cover letter of a patch series leaves everything about the changes unclear, I throw my laptop out the window (actually, I suppress the urge and just delete the mail thread in my mail reader) and move to the next mail. It sounds a bit stupid to cater to myself in patches *I* submit, but I refuse to believe that there are many people with more time on their hands than myself (last time I tried to research this, it looked as everybody has the same 86,400 seconds per day available, give or take the occasional leap second). > And unfortunately much of the relevant information is not repeated > there. The cover letter mentions: > > - that Visual Studio is a motivating example That was actually on purpose. Personally, I want to read the motivation in the cover letter, and not get distracted by it when reading the commit logs. To make you happy, I added this, though. > - that this is conceptually similar to Unix sockets To make you happy, I added this, too. > - that those do not need to be marked as inheritable, as the process > can simply open the named pipe. No global flags. No problems. I just added "(and therefore no inherited handles need to be closed)" to the last sentence of 1/3's commit message that already mentioned this. > - that this has already seem some testing in Git for Windows (i.e. > analagous information to what a Tested-by footer would say) I mentioned this twice, in 1/3's and in 3/3's commit message. > It is also just more readable than patch 1/3's commit message. That's > to be expected, since it was written later. My second draft of > something is often clearer than the first draft. I took your cue and simply replaced the first paragraph of 1/3's commit message by the first paragraph of the cover letter. Ciao, Dscho