git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, barkalow@iabervon.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] builtin-remote: better handling of multiple remote HEADs
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 11:48:34 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vy6w8sstp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090214185411.GA13121@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Sat, 14 Feb 2009 13:54:11 -0500")

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> Which made me think of something else, with all of this talk about
> reviewers that has been going on. Junio is actually in a little bit of a
> special position with small changes (like style issues) to say "I'll
> apply this, but tweak these changes".

It is not that I am special.

What is special is an otherwise obviously good patch with a few trivial
mistakes that I can fix locally without worrying the fix-up may be wrong.
It is not even per author, it is per patch, and it is a rare exception.

Often, I notice these things *after* I applied and reviewed the results,
so it already is in my work area.  I then judge the tradeoff between an
extra round (which as you stated needs another fresh review, patch
application and testing here) and the possibility that I may make a silly
mistake myself while attempting a fix-up (such a mistake by me will not
be seen on the list and others do not have chance to catch them).

For this reason, I try to keep these "will fix up no need for resend" to
the minimum and only to the most trivial cases.

> ... But the rest of us are stuck
> saying "I would change this one line" to the list; then either:
>
>   - the original submitter re-rolls the patch, which takes their time
>     and everyone else's time to look at the new patch, see that it is
>     trivially changed, etc
>
>     or
>
>   - Junio has to read the followup comments, then go back and find the
>     spot in the original patch to mark it up.

A third option is:

	"I would change this and that" review comment message, followed by
	a separate message "Here is how I would have done it", addressed
	To: the original submitter (with in-body From: line), Cc: to the
	list and me.

The original submitter can verify the latter one, and either agree to or
disagree with it.  If the reroll is good, then I can just pick it up.  I
think you have done that in the past yourself, and the process made my
life a lot easier.

  reply	other threads:[~2009-02-14 19:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-02-13  8:54 [PATCH 0/4] remote HEAD improvements take 2 Jay Soffian
2009-02-13  8:54 ` [PATCH 1/4] builtin-clone: move locate_head() to remote.c so it can be re-used Jay Soffian
2009-02-13  8:54   ` [PATCH 2/4] builtin-remote: move duplicated cleanup code its own function Jay Soffian
2009-02-13  8:54     ` [PATCH 3/4] builtin-remote: teach show to display remote HEAD Jay Soffian
2009-02-13  8:54       ` [PATCH 4/4] builtin-remote: add set-head verb Jay Soffian
2009-02-13 10:09         ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-13 10:21           ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-13 11:42             ` [PATCH v2 4/4] builtin-remote: add set-head subcommand Jay Soffian
2009-02-13 10:35           ` [PATCH 4/4] builtin-remote: add set-head verb Junio C Hamano
2009-02-13 10:52             ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-14  0:22           ` Jeff King
2009-02-14  2:00             ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-14  2:18               ` Jeff King
2009-02-14  2:48                 ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-14  2:59               ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-14  3:43                 ` Jeff King
2009-02-14 10:30                   ` [PATCH] builtin-remote: better handling of multiple remote HEADs Jay Soffian
2009-02-14 17:54                     ` Jeff King
2009-02-14 18:35                       ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-14 18:54                         ` Jeff King
2009-02-14 19:48                           ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2009-02-14 20:21                       ` Daniel Barkalow
2009-02-14 21:15                         ` Jeff King
2009-02-15  6:08                           ` Jeff King
2009-02-15  6:10                             ` [PATCH 1/5] test scripts: refactor start_httpd helper Jeff King
2009-02-15  6:12                             ` [PATCH 2/5] add basic http clone/fetch tests Jeff King
2009-02-15  8:01                               ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-15  6:12                             ` [PATCH 3/5] refactor find_refs_by_name to accept const list Jeff King
2009-02-15  6:16                             ` [PATCH 4/5] remote: refactor guess_remote_head Jeff King
2009-02-15  6:18                             ` [PATCH 5/5] remote: use exact HEAD lookup if it is available Jeff King
2009-02-15 15:22                               ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-15 19:58                               ` Jeff King
2009-02-15 20:00                                 ` [PATCH 1/2] transport: cleanup duplicated ref fetching code Jeff King
2009-02-15 20:01                                 ` [PATCH 2/2] transport: unambiguously determine local HEAD Jeff King
2009-02-15  5:27                     ` [PATCH] builtin-remote: better handling of multiple remote HEADs Jeff King
2009-02-15  5:34                       ` Jeff King
2009-02-15 14:13                       ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-15 15:12                         ` Jeff King
2009-02-16  2:21                         ` Junio C Hamano
2009-02-16  2:58                           ` Jay Soffian
2009-02-13  8:57 ` [PATCH 0/4] remote HEAD improvements take 2 Jay Soffian

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=7vy6w8sstp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jaysoffian@gmail.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    /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).