From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=202.12.124.151 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1792758628; b=iPt1G+TP7Bvv/Ra5CLzX6Y5G4Xhjc1ZCnobC16y9t0lLnsZ90c5lUftnUbuH01RvWQzA qFe+MzXbVBxK7o7DouJRD6y0+sXAZSu49m5/VhdHRc3rzDAFFdkpgMaoTw/AU85hR4XXn BXwbBkablTlnONiPCI6aNbzT1JWNiyOUGx10TC085rbB/YGjquDWy/cIqs8Vfhd/UNoqn CthwIxz183cv8ZWhcm6Yc+4IhdxZUadLVO5DoOFyoez5ycjpkWHKcKrLMeOyDtWajKKbO sw5SPmVnNvyErtYXyvFiUmB1A/9O+vPWsQangbQhsQtv5GDAnuUjH5g2fTVAiHKEFgg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792758628; h=DMARC-Filter:Received:Received:DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature: X-DKIM2-Info:DKIM2-Signature:X-DKIM2-Info:Message-Instance: X-ME-Sender:X-ME-Received:X-ME-Proxy-Cause:X-ME-Proxy:Feedback-ID: Received:Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; bh=GEeL2yEtKXg4olAD+GnDvIokOWZz5QsYmzn7BS1bV30=; b=gm3Uo3EFqhMzUv+7nl6yrRZKulrQ173wi7DyJrOQRr1CEbhQ8QwTO9uRQJgfsij2iVQI mSfaGYzEjnrvalfcnX9YtPtJshZ2tAaAZGnavzL6OAyjf/0oLWdCcFtEOLL2pzTGyV/ky Uoi8R58oClRlsWKQymdMZWhIId9UUK659OskznOxeG770BzLKS8YRkocIqLj9TVRVVbQN oK79Nw914sVkiAYSKVgnVOEgPOnhkYkhe5xXIY32aBZpVtHW5KV77ntCFsgrST2afF5+T w5DOON/HXMHf86XbuNZqpl/+hfqZO8mkqBQv+82zR5ANjvRTTIq/cT9VvYefMPjdIKw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=VidFiToh; dkim=pass header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=ZaGFxzXA; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=202.12.124.151 Received: from fout-b8-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b8-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.151]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1ADE5606A320 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 12:30:27 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 1ADE5606A320 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=VidFiToh; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=ZaGFxzXA Received: from phl-compute-06.internal (phl-compute-06.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C39B1D00212 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:30:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-04 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-06.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:30:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1792758627; x=1792845027; bh=GEeL2yEtKX g4olAD+GnDvIokOWZz5QsYmzn7BS1bV30=; b=VidFiTohv/f0kI8NuqEfun5dfc zROy/p6RaB2F2QE69oCd/H9k65ROd2VWxqAfIDBtGE124WTd5BcbjBYMlFcWpznG 6lKP/K874s481ot7GcUOsQnli6i4/WML/T0X3r167DaKEkUhLoY2Sn+cVrVjKYtK DH2XwOOPULn3mpuTVlF1z13VZmpY4GaSMJxYU5tGcn7cL6RNkHqKbJQeY/8hucjW RFicppTmeUwGoREANdm6Jb/ior+1W8yNTxZbyc1QK4hrdlmI4xvYGxP6jh9dbRk+ 9A8pLj6MMx/U0sX3pJisCxucrg2EtgkkKOs6g0YRN7Boe0aXTowTUTrL1uEQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1792758627; x=1792845027; bh=GEeL2yEtKXg4olAD+GnDvIokOWZz5QsYmzn 7BS1bV30=; b=ZaGFxzXAWq2w9s7ca4MV7LcVTuC014qF3ceS1jO3Oc0KsS+R9sW paisbcde0ViL6Esp8grVXPR2u4mSfkhax4Ly960CqS4nd9g4slBnnmMMbJOtR9MA nLxinBUejcjzPtECfH2pB9jzXj/NYjJzDoPIGxg56I2d5g7OmhoXQ3CNI68Lr8YA 0tb34kDmror2wVYmPSTP84q6E0DsTj95kKIox1+IVNPioYYHpMSu40jPOspddAUT 8vRNrkFlCtMVe/EfSvjq8lFrFH41hwjJGUzK7gMF/EiMJ1czueFbSKmUvn/mPuh1 osQ/lptOoQQH52TpF3jH/LHB45aXE/ix+Fg== X-DKIM2-Info: draft=ietf-dkim-dkim2-spec-07; repo=github.com/dkim2wg/interop; date=2026-10-18; sw=lmtpprox; action=sign d=pks.im a=rsa-sha256; DKIM2-Signature: i=1; m=1; t=1792758627; d=pks.im; mf=PHBzQHBrcy5pbT4=; rt=PGdpdEB2Z2VyLmtlcm5lbC5vcmc+; s=fm2:rsa-sha256:UG5ViNKWET403pRyxuKmb/q0W7H1K8orBXywSp6MN23Sev6 RrcjdJ9BCfmU1snrSMJwy1oKTnGtwBtr9RieaRksgPh6cmMGz3ILBCdFexruGze+ DfDjoubxRxnF+ZqNKQLVYoYKnMElnazfsMxPDiJayRlKHgT3dNcFd/szP01KgbtG XqXC9iXzvVXzsPHDuWiYJmMti5LtQJ6TePGb+23mnGkgk22IwZYzMgeoVkEbfdb1 8hL/05WiCEAVpieXVlLJNdlJWKCxriW+a6ABXVullYjPhwJTExTwBRq4TsEpakDW t9fUGHhUsGXPGokikfgd1QNn0J3LwNPtd8ZfBMA==; X-DKIM2-Info: draft=ietf-dkim-dkim2-spec-07; repo=github.com/dkim2wg/interop; date=2026-10-18; sw=lmtpprox; action=mi-m=1; hc=12; hn=cc,content-disposition,content-type,date,feedback-id,from, in-reply-to,message-id,mime-version,references,subject,to; Message-Instance: m=1; h=sha256:9mibtwWt05wwzgbdt5YAGEzrBRO1qIap560TiFGeRzo=:lHKFn1RDI8K/JxwRvDxyFhVSpN7G2k98BsigEz0OXg4=; X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: dmFkZTFylThyd5lCxdNrZVp8QhDvP3h3JONBT1NI2+G9iufXoUrycp/DCL+12U2UTeljzs s8UNnk/Smr1GJlumilNCM57prJxQmX+vSafjPstENwEQcQETcsP92KxuEe6RyHYF5A33vx f9B+Gcg2Bu50pDyn/FpRgD5Gymfc+GUpXa61g4Lsy6AOwaXc9A1O3rmKruqphcFuC9BySv PpJ1kDjRPypBGsDASrg2aEbx8h1eG6fmvn4E8XEnYMx1h5ZX3tWV11zyzuJ8UIIdpXQg8l NOHA6Z0q4B70EviMQAvShxW7SgTA2EoZKiEmRJMikeflRoeDSFHMhESEYtwCHjwE94Pvo9 /rNzK+A0281ib3794FxBzy37APj7bqz7OylzbY9Oa3FYFpeSegRCZFnBjbWv2x5hMZZX53 rdktiDj58Cro/SLVFqR2wXMDd3CXIBVpXNGfVKH/QuJ3ypRCt8OY0BRZfHD2dnMFZOk1Rj 3M+4IHSv1Gy0qsrK3qpGuULB8SdkAg9rZQqtXlJrievYdwtC7GrMA41vsoQ53SUxdn5YJq rklK7JzKut4WF5CvCXz5edvQ5Kiv2hJZK0Mz4rR48wS1AiMTVtItGAH8vPZ67oA8/7tjLN nGYsJ4gY+qAdLUFRzbAdUETPesAoLJ/u33aKhtR+2UfRGV+yBh8uqpS++E0A X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:30:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 70a1724f (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Fri, 23 Oct 2026 12:30:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2026 14:30:22 +0200 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] MyFirstContribution: discuss then reroll Message-ID: References: <20261022211404.380904-1-gitster@pobox.com> X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20261022211404.380904-1-gitster@pobox.com> On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 02:14:02PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > The MyFirstContribution document tells readers how to send v1, how > to send v2, and then how to respond to reviews, in that order. It > uses a fairly weak language "it is a good manners to ..." to respond > to reviews before rerolling. > > On the mailing list, we find ourselves more and more frequently > having to tell new contributors not to send updated iterations of > their patches before having any review discussion on the current > iteration. > > Here is an attempt to rectify the situation. > > The first patch reorders the sections to explain how to send v1, how > to respond to reviews, before explaining how to send v2. > > The second patch rewrites the "how to respond to reviews" section to > strengthen the "it is a good manners" by replacing it with "do not > send v2 before you have finished discussing v1". > > Relative to v3, this rewrites the "responding to reviews" section > more tightly, shaving about 1/5 words, without losing substance. Is this me or is there no v3? I cannot find it online, either. > Range-diff against v3: > 1: e6f4a2a7ca = 1: 9db8ec4b98 MyFirstContribution: move "how to send v2" after discussing reviews > 2: 27f47d7d65 ! 2: 88abda272c MyFirstContribution: clarify that "reviewing" is a discussion > @@ Commit message > section largely duplicates the discussion on what to do after > getting a review, which is covered in the subsequent section. Also, > the "Reviewing" section does not make it clear from the beginning > - that reviewing is a process of discussion with your reviewers to design > - what the next iteration should look like. > + that reviewing is a process of discussion with your reviewers. > > Rewrite the "Reviewing" section with stronger language to discourage > sending a 'v2' iteration before working together with the reviewers > @@ Documentation/MyFirstContribution.adoc: previous one" patches over 2 days), revi > -reviewers' questions may be useful thing to use. Your goal is to make > -your v2 clear enough so that it becomes unnecessary for you to give the > -same explanation to the next person who reads it. > -+After a few days, you will hopefully receive a reply to your patch > -+series with some comments. Carefully read them to understand the > -+reviewers' perspective. Do not hesitate to ask for clarification if > -+you do not understand their suggestions. > ++After a few days, you may receive comments on your patch series. > ++Carefully read them to understand the reviewers' perspective, and do > ++not hesitate to ask for clarification. This overall includes way more changes than expected relative to v2, but I don't mind condensing our docs a bit. > -+Reviewers may also ask about what you wrote in the patch series, > -+either in the proposed commit log message or in the changes > -+themselves. Answer these questions in your response. Often, > -+reviewers ask because your patch series needs clarification to be > -+understood; use this as feedback to improve the clarity of your > -+writing. When answering, remember to update the patch itself so that > -+the next reader will not need to ask the same question. > ++Reviewers may also ask about your proposed commit log or the changes. > ++Answer these in your response. They often ask because the patch needs > ++clarification; use this feedback to improve your writing, and update > ++the patch so the next reader does not have to ask the same question. > + > -+Do not start coding, let alone send the next version of your patch, > -+until you have finished discussing the current one so both sides know > -+what to expect. This saves time for everyone. Reviewers can respond > -+to your explanation before you spend time preparing a patch they might > -+reject, and they will not have to inspect 'v2' only to find their > ++Do not start coding, much less send the next version, until you finish > ++discussing the current one and both sides know what to expect. This > ++saves time, lets reviewers respond before you write a patch they have > ++to reject, and avoids forcing them to inspect 'v2' only to find their > +concerns unaddressed. This is the new version that we've discussed. Patrick