From: Junio C Hamano <email@example.com>
To: Will Chandler <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Bagas Sanjaya <email@example.com>,
Konstantin Ryabitsev <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Jeff King <email@example.com>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] refs: cleanup directories when deleting packed ref
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 10:15:49 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YJgt2UzAdhFfrDHm@mini.wfchandler.org> (Will Chandler's message of "Sun, 9 May 2021 14:45:45 -0400")
Will Chandler <email@example.com> writes:
> Thank you, Junio. Would it be helpful if I sent a separate '[PATCH v2]'
> Apologies for not following the correct procedure for the revised patch.
> I was relying on 'SubmittingPatches', but I've since found the detailed
> instructions on submitting revisions in 'MyFirstContribution.txt'.
I am not sure if there is anything to apologize for on your part.
The procedures we use have grown over time, and there certainly
would be documentation gaps.
I think the best current practice is
1. In a thread that originates at a non-patch message, or in a
review discussion thread for a patch, it is welcome to use "How
about doing it this way?" patches as an illustration to explain
your idea in a more concrete way than just in prose. But it is
unwelcome to leave the patch buried in the discussion, without
making it easier to find it (see 3.)
2. In such a thread, "By the way, I thought of this unrelated
tangent, and here is a patch to demonstrate the idea" is not
entirely unwelcome, but keep it brief and make sure you get out
of the thread quickly to avoid distracting the main discussion.
3. In either case, it makes it easier to find the final submission
of the patch if it is not buried deep in the discussion.
a. It is OK to start a new thread (without in-reply-to), with
"here is a polished version of the patch and/or the idea I
floated in <message-id>" under the three-dash line (for a
single patch) or in the cover letter (for a series).
b. An updated iteration of a multi-patch series sometimes is made
as a direct response to the cover letter of the previous
iteration (iow, the cover letter for vN+1 has the message id
of the cover letter for vN on its in-reply-to header).
I think the "b4" tool prefers 3b. over 3a., and it may be also easy
on human readers who read the list in threaded mail/news reader.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-10 1:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-07 14:37 [PATCH] refs: cleanup directories when deleting packed ref Will Chandler
2021-05-07 21:56 ` Jeff King
2021-05-07 22:02 ` Jeff King
2021-05-07 22:57 ` Jeff King
2021-05-08 4:27 ` Will Chandler
2021-05-08 5:00 ` Will Chandler
2021-05-08 5:21 ` Bagas Sanjaya
2021-05-08 6:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-05-09 18:45 ` Will Chandler
2021-05-10 1:15 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2021-05-11 1:35 ` Jeff King
2021-05-11 4:58 ` Junio C Hamano
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).