From: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>,
Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>,
Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
A Large Angry SCM <gitzilla@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 19:29:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130611182936.GM22905@serenity.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7v38sod1kn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:00:56AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> > * When reviewing other peoples' code, be tactful and constructive. Set
> > high expectations, but do what you can to help the submitter achieve
> > them. Don't demand changes based only on your personal preferences.
> > Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
>
> I think this is 30% aimed at me (as I think I do about that much of
> the reviews around here). I fully agree with most of them, but the
> last sentence is a bit too fuzzy to be a practically useful
> guideline. Somebody's bare minimum is somebody else's perfection.
> An unqualified "perfect is the enemy of good" is often incorrectly
> used to justify "It works for me." and "There already are other
> codepaths that do it in the same wrong way.", both of which make
> things _worse_ for the long term project health.
One thing that I think is missing from these proposals so far is some
clear indication that a review should not be confrontational. Consider
the following two review comments (taken from a recent example that
happened to stick in my mind, but I don't want to single out any one
individual here):
Ugh, why this roundabout-passive-past tone? Use imperative tone
like this:
...
vs.
We normally use the imperative in commit messages, perhaps like
this?
...
Both say the same thing but the first immediately puts the submitter on
the defensive. If I see something like that on one of my patches I have
to consciously resist the urge to reply immediately and instead review
what I'm about to send once I've calmed down.
I realise that we shouldn't take offence to review comments, but we are
all human and it is sometimes hard not to take things personally.
In the examples above, the first makes it feel like the submitter is
fighting to get a patch included, but the second feels like we're
collaborating to get to the best result for the project.
As my mother would say, "politeness costs nothing" ;-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-11 18:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-10 13:28 [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-10 13:50 ` Célestin Matte
2013-06-10 14:04 ` Matthieu Moy
2013-06-10 16:25 ` Robin H. Johnson
2013-06-10 17:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-10 19:01 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-06-10 19:45 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-10 20:41 ` A Large Angry SCM
2013-06-10 20:56 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-10 21:09 ` A Large Angry SCM
2013-06-11 5:16 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 8:56 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-11 4:41 ` Michael Haggerty
2013-06-11 6:28 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 10:45 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-11 11:49 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 12:33 ` Thomas Rast
2013-06-11 13:40 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-11 14:40 ` Michael Haggerty
2013-06-11 15:34 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 18:16 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-11 18:43 ` Michael Haggerty
2013-06-11 18:55 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-11 19:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-11 19:39 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 23:48 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 19:55 ` Brandon Casey
2013-06-12 11:56 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-06-12 12:29 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-12 13:58 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 15:06 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 15:41 ` Thomas Rast
2013-06-11 15:52 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 16:10 ` Thomas Rast
2013-06-11 16:17 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 17:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-11 18:24 ` Michael Haggerty
2013-06-11 18:29 ` John Keeping [this message]
2013-06-11 18:46 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-11 19:54 ` John Keeping
2013-06-12 11:26 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-12 13:14 ` John Keeping
2013-06-11 18:52 ` Michael Haggerty
2013-06-11 19:19 ` John Keeping
2013-06-11 19:46 ` Philip Oakley
2013-06-12 0:08 ` John Szakmeister
2013-06-12 14:49 ` Jakub Narebski
2013-06-12 20:54 ` Philip Oakley
2013-06-11 19:35 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 20:33 ` Jeff King
2013-06-11 20:55 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-11 23:19 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-12 12:27 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-06-12 14:06 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-12 12:03 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-12 20:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-13 3:45 ` Michael Haggerty
2013-06-13 4:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-11 5:38 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-11 11:11 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-06-13 10:19 ` Thomas Adam
2013-06-13 13:36 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-06-14 9:48 ` Christian Couder
Reply instructions:
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:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130611182936.GM22905@serenity.lan \
--to=john@keeping.me.uk \
--cc=artagnon@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=gitzilla@gmail.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* 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).