From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qv1-f43.google.com (mail-qv1-f43.google.com [209.85.219.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15D902F2E for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2024 12:06:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.219.43 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728216385; cv=none; b=kOWSKIwg+8b/oCyvYP+6zWQHxr7aZ5LFCHdaPluCUzz4Kc3aDq4h9zxeLQ1chBdJpBAhhs+/Ih8UEBrSsQ3UhzVT8C/UwmOqgDGFHMdrAnYJYfpag7b0WGLwhEtADusM7Vw9N3DkkS5VFi+I2YfjgRjTN5Z3hNqHIXsnuG9CYsQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728216385; c=relaxed/simple; bh=d5BOFGkCbgUqBuC5fsCFoQBUT4hZMETypkp9BajETP0=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=VTfJN0FpJXSY/ctOSQ4v17bo96YAIxHF3NuAihEM8ChMFC5xBgXhaWMYMoD7mh8IGLjgDdf97C5Wul8OqZYIXkiAyptRf9I5bsTQzl2CJfcKu2SWWk/9zDv1AKsAIL47hwC4xttlm0brVq9obKYPi8paeNf9STGvYbboJNYwbhg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sunshineco.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.219.43 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sunshineco.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-qv1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6cb36237f28so5040046d6.3 for ; Sun, 06 Oct 2024 05:06:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728216382; x=1728821182; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=d5BOFGkCbgUqBuC5fsCFoQBUT4hZMETypkp9BajETP0=; b=lJZ1t1MoPdoFYR+oJa2Dl6Iec0FnnN+GlOp6xfVGNaG+IEh8ls0EDMQ4K/ayRGBa2b Y90LMhdM3wzvzayBqfzXsGG0aFf6WZ7X1F7eGaKSNmZzJn52XR//zC9FWywfzjrzzHhm bjORUTmSGXpLnvEE8iGrplhbJ9JKxMhC1QEwUR0RzejCET5ZcPPeC3izBKbin6Xq2r/o Ll7W5DVQdby3RmnyEVfjLoAM6hCycwEjgsmsKRl/jbwtgzb5Qh5QLIK9XOTcfWtGUb0L D27duiv03jfE3w4YBeXMwGVdexDnqlAzxG/38uuk4Kmc/jDFUDfZ043aMwvErcCKXHp1 qzew== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWddUd8SZi32SgiW0tXwck9R2NuXs41x7bn+pqaHSnlKxJS/zNt2CwQw+G1y1As2SP2p0I=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzORiTdWevJ9dOLy+XNhC5eIxapqApdU1DTTlSthKAOhnwUBkMF YyDORyb0ZkZWt14JWqtNgRoy23/QqFX396uL018dg8FN4O8syYeGLz8VEeqsJxcbMPeVTBkF4i6 wWuwD/WNgohcvXL3Y8wqD+MYDUYXCSw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFbeNza57DvhBtbqypVP4iOmWCmwpKte2jSo3qiBq4o6+rTptOulmBTiqGcbWCmmzf72kip7Mm1IlTLAV9c8JU= X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5bc8:0:b0:6cb:6782:6a8c with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6cb9a54e244mr56508816d6.12.1728216382018; Sun, 06 Oct 2024 05:06:22 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Eric Sunshine Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2024 08:06:10 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] [Outreachy][Patch v1] t3404: avoid losing exit status to pipes To: shejialuo Cc: Usman Akinyemi via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Usman Akinyemi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Oct 6, 2024 at 7:12=E2=80=AFAM shejialuo wrot= e: > On Sun, Oct 06, 2024 at 05:19:13AM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote: > > It probably would have been helpful to reviewers if the patch's > > commit message mentioned that it only converts some of the > > instances, but it's not worth rerolling the patch just for that. > > Except that, the commit title should not either include > "[Outreachy][Patch v1]" here. From these two reasons, I think we should > reroll the patch. Your observation about outdated/confusing "[foo]" annotations is certainly something the submitter should take into consideration for future submissions, but does not seem worthy of a reroll, IMHO. First, `git am` will strip those off automatically, so they won't become part of the permanent project history anyhow when/if Junio picks up the patch. Second, asking for a reroll for something which does not impact the correctness of either the patch or the commit message just makes busy-work for the submitter and wastes reviewer time (which is a limited resource on this project). Third, the point of a microproject is to expose the submitter to the workflow of the Git project and to the review process, and for reviewers to see how the submitter responds. That goal has already been achieved in this case, and rerolling for something so minor provides no additional benefit in that regard.