Re: [PATCH 00/49] repack: prepare for incremental MIDX-based repacking

Taylor Blau
2025-10-07T20:44:06Z

On Sun, Sep 28, 2025 at 03:58:00PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:
>
> > * This series depends on ps/packfile-store at dd52a29b78 (packfile:
> > refactor `get_packed_git_mru()` to work on packfile store,
> > 2025-09-23).
> >
> > * This series is split out of my local copy of
> > tb/incremental-midx-part-3. I suggest queueing it as
> > tb/incremental-midx-part-3.1 ;-).
>
> Both of these comments are very much appreciated. Do we say
> something to encourage these in our developer-facing documentation?

Thanks.

> The points to stress are:
>
> - If you are not building directly on top of the recent tip of
> 'master', mention what topics that are not yet in 'master' your
> patches depend on.

I think that this one is covered in general by 0a02ca2383
(SubmittingPatches: simplify guidance for choosing a starting point,
2023-07-14). The language added there is a little more generic, since it
suggests mentioning how you constructed a base branch when a new topic
depends on >1 other topics.

I would imagine it's clear to readers there that "if I am describing how
to build a base branch which merges in multiple topics, I should
likewise list the topic branch by name if I am building on top of a
single one already in the maintainer's tree."

> - If your series is a part of a larger effort, briefly describe
> what your overall direction and grand vision is, and state where
> in that grand picture the current series fits.

Not covered.

> - If you have a short one-line summary for the topic to be used as
> a topic branch name in mind, do suggest it.

Sort of covered by your d255105c99 (SubmittingPatches: release-notes
entry experiment, 2024-03-25), but that talks more about the summary for
RelNotes purposes, not the topic branch name.

I'll send out a short series to add some more guidelines to cover the
above in our Documentation/SubmittingPatches.

> Thanks.

Thanks,
Taylor