Re: [PATCH 1/3] cherry: cache patch-ids to avoid repeating work

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

"Geoffrey Irving" <irving@naml.us> writes:

> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> ...
>>>  }

Please don't quote the whole thing without trimming if you do not have any
interspersed comments/responses to quoted part.

> Should I rewrite the patch sequence to incorporate these changes into
> the first commit, or add them as a forth commit off the end?

I strongly encourage the latter.  We try not to keep early mistakes in the
history (see my comments on your [2/3]).

It is not unusal for any sizeable new code to go through a few round of
review cycle without even queued to 'pu', and the general rule is until
the series hits 'next', it is either "rejected (dropped on the floor),
please resend an improved version" or "ok now it is good, will queue".
After queued in 'next', improvements will continue incrementally.

Think of this procedure as giving a chance for you to hide early
embarrassment under the rug ;-)