From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: add section for iterating patches
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 07:15:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zkbn9_-cOiapWSSb@tanuki> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240514123039.1029081-1-knayak@gitlab.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4245 bytes --]
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 02:30:39PM +0200, Karthik Nayak wrote:
> From: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
>
> Add a section to explain how to work around other in-flight patches and
> how to navigate conflicts which arise as a series is being iterated.
> This will provide the necessary steps that users can follow to reduce
s/This will/This provides/
> friction with other ongoing topics and also provides guidelines on how
> the users can also communicate this to the list efficiently.
>
> Co-authored-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
> ---
>
> This came off a discussion wherein I sent a series based on `next`
> instead of merging in conflicts [1]. This is mostly worded by Junio and
> I've just put it together into a patch.
>
> This is based off master, with 'jc/patch-flow-updates' merged in.
:)
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqy18lpoqg.fsf@gitster.g/
>
> Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 79 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> index 8332073e27..2fd94dc8de 100644
> --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> @@ -608,6 +608,85 @@ patch, format it as "multipart/signed", not a text/plain message
> that starts with `-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----`. That is
> not a text/plain, it's something else.
>
> +=== Handling Conflicts and Iterating Patches
> +
> +When revising changes made to your patches, it's important to
> +acknowledge the possibility of conflicts with other ongoing topics. To
> +navigate these potential conflicts effectively, follow the recommended
> +steps outlined below:
Okay. I was first wondering why we only mention conflicts when revising
changes. But I see there are other parts in the document where we
already mention the potential for conflicts, so this is fine.
> +. Build on a suitable base branch, see the <<choose-starting-point, section above>>,
> +and format-patch the series. If you are doing "rebase -i" in-place to
> +update from the previous round, this will reuse the previous base so
> +(2) and (3) may become trivial.
> +
> +. Find the base of where the last round was queued
It's somewhat unusual for bulleted lists to start with a dot, but this
is consistent with the remainder of this document.
[snip]
> +Do not forget to write in the cover letter you did this, including the
> +topics you have in your base on top of 'master'. Then go to (4).
> +
> +. Make a trial merge of your topic into 'next' and 'seen', e.g.
> ++
> + $ git checkout --detach 'origin/seen' &&
> + $ git revert -m 1 <the merge of the previous iteration into seen> &&
> + $ git merge kn/ref-transaction-symref
Let's remove the trailing '&&' lines. The leading dollar indicates that
this is interactive, so you wouldn't concatenate the commands like this.
Also, preceding code didn't have it.
> +The "revert" is needed if the previous iteration of your topic is
> +already in 'seen' (like in this case). You could choose to rebuild
> +master..origin/seen from scratch while excluding your previous
> +iteration, which may emulate what happens on the maintainers end more
> +closely.
> ++
> +This trial merge may conflict. It is primarily to see what conflicts
> +_other_ topics may have with your topic. In other words, you do not
> +have to depend on to make your topic work on 'master'. It may become
I think there's either a word too many or missing -- depend on what?
> +the job of the other topic owners to resolve conflicts if your topic
> +goes to 'next' before theirs.
> ++
> +Make a note on what conflict you saw in the cover letter. You do not
> +necessarily have to resolve them, but it would be a good opportunity to
> +learn what others are doing in an related area.
s/an/a
> ++
> + $ git checkout --detach 'origin/next' &&
> + $ git merge kn/ref-transaction-symref
Same comment here regarding the ampersands.
Other than that the additions look good to me, thanks!
Patrick
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-17 5:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-14 12:30 [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: add section for iterating patches Karthik Nayak
2024-05-17 5:15 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2024-05-17 11:33 ` Karthik Nayak
2024-05-17 17:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-05-21 6:17 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-05-17 12:27 ` [PATCH v2] " Karthik Nayak
2024-05-17 17:24 ` Junio C Hamano
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=Zkbn9_-cOiapWSSb@tanuki \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=karthik.188@gmail.com \
/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).