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=-6.3 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 02FB91FAAD for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 15:35:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932452AbdA3Pfi (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2017 10:35:38 -0500 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:54829 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932465AbdA3Pf3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2017 10:35:29 -0500 Received: from virtualbox ([37.201.192.48]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MbsV8-1co6RQ3hJO-00JL9r; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:35:07 +0100 Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:35:05 +0100 (CET) From: Johannes Schindelin X-X-Sender: virtualbox@virtualbox To: Junio C Hamano cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Sverre Rabbelier , =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=86var_Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0_Bjarmason?= , Matthieu Moy Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] t/Makefile: add a rule to re-run previously-failed tests In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <85044791cfcba35c1ad3d8138051f3f075cb0646.1485526641.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> <0563f07117e828c072ba542c1a57441e2e8efb81.1485537593.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:+nuVtHEVyNmx+ANt7W8wRj8MlhzjIkF5JHm8FPt3ccwocKM+qUU Riyn5IT2SbDQZoVgqUzm7gd1R5uUMON/laDcxCL/CARjRnb1ySulEkSehDhIeFM2k0Tpf1o jJBocxCwUHXjt/EPlXH1NbBKD8eLDymnqBPHerFpDgXOOVMimcaJyyEf0v9vBdKqw6G98BI ZD9vBrsghbRckvsAnIpBQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:Y3Hl5fNM8lk=:eJX9L92lTKeR3wb0uvRQ7v WfcCwbJu9L7U38vseNudEpf/DN/YI90vjEKjs10Mp1xQFyCuZsWZVnrYj7sd7VDZZA5SdNMVS 6GtAqa1ZdTfnPAVQNtgAlzii/2pg6oz+QwlgT7CGlyk3aZ94T9qB7+bGlVVVrRbXS8PWFA/+u ZyPK/DYApAD2II2TfcUpLpeBKOvC0vpfcRfJw27zUFd0oBj/B3IYm3N8C80BPRJIFjs6FP8II xSjhi9xCy2Gh3pMFbgaaU2nGuoll/h02VB8cyfSZ4kxyAUfe9z+N22+3hQXE5R+Etpl5jzSYx T62peSiZYcUCy+YMtqKuwkjMITBG5ZFjGNsnK/Cy9S9eh3DB2wFUuxPaXmq+EPwswIAZdk5wf dLIRZkps2ac26c1uycicF2AbHiRxWb8hnF7DAicDwFyflK65Te9OyaEuImatxMK6dQiQCMJ76 jC7QupGxGSa5qZk9ZEOUBa+mQztK9LWphVLmRmodIeK6t3cm/0vY/aLYo9B0LIMOBJN1MVW8O q6hHsC3B/ZDhmZVcZkFDIEX5vWEwm1h9072gS6IAsCFKBkmWrDeAMgS7uOnmv1Hoi8T30USrl T0u0Zru5ynDzVNA2U+gY0xTi95r2HIOSRL4Jr+Pm0hx3uO+lhEYHectwo3Qim/e3fe3xe5Mcv RWalCNSvE+Obvq4ZqZBukOqMpW2JLCkGKBjXnZTtYam6ZMMdiQnjrx3/P0k+pGAbImSzIV6L0 XVFTUG3nXxufy5ZkYgPHrZiR7b/lQvTT2kzD8wtM5xwj5IH1LWebnljAtGRoHAPgzEBQz50v0 C+6xeatbIl3ENcaBi1wY0y8UHL4epwn7l9rZz48KIiaPWrUZOskVQHvm8/J5z8AANQzrh+2fk NKEM3Wwq717Dm3OiBw+JYcyUzUQAtL287iTD8CQyxGWQizPSfPUsAiQHNWXHZSKZHE5B0sZXc +wBni8hHC2BcNctDbLCGhVAO5c/f2gt5SAaBwnXTcJtIzXYrD4EV60/i+oAISumimye96lK0e LAJ/wrnZvd6TqqjfJfI5oe/CBWlsI+Z1jCQjK2UrEQg1 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Junio, On Fri, 27 Jan 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > This patch automates the process of determining which tests failed > > previously and re-running them. > > ... > > > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin > > I stored both versions in files and compared them, and it seems the > single word change in the proposed commit log message is the only > difference. I would have written "Automate the process...", though. Yes, we have different styles. Thanks for letting my commit keep my commit message this time ;-) > If you are resending, touching up to cover all points raised by a > reviewer and doing nothing else, having "Reviewed-by: Jeff King > " would have been nicer. TBH I am not at all sure that I know when to add those footers and when not. After having been asked to remove such a footer, I decided to *not* include them by default. Having gray zones about the footers strikes me as similar to having gray zones in the coding style guidelines: it sure gives the contributors more freedom, but it also creates uncertainty and as a consequence takes up a lot of reviewing space and time (hence taking away space and time from reviewing the code for bugs). In other words: while I appreciate the idea of giving contributors such as myself a lot of leeway, I would love even more to be able to automate away tedious and boring tasks (such as adding Tested-by: or Reviewed-by: footers, or for that matter, addressing code style issues before any reviewer has to shed bikes so that they can focus on the parts of the review that no machine can do for them). Ciao, Johannes