Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] MyFirstContribution: clarify that "reviewing" is a discussion

[Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2026 at 04:22:42PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/MyFirstContribution.adoc b/Documentation/MyFirstContribution.adoc
> index 682c797e3c..3fd6587e5a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/MyFirstContribution.adoc
> +++ b/Documentation/MyFirstContribution.adoc
> @@ -1314,56 +1314,42 @@ previous one" patches over 2 days), reviewers would strongly prefer if a
>  single polished version came 2 days later instead, and that version with
>  fewer mistakes were the only one they would need to review.
>  
> -This consideration applies not only when going from the initial patch to v2,
> -but also to later iterations of the same series. There is no fixed rule for how
> -long to wait before sending a new version. A useful default is to send at most
> -one new version of the same patch series per day. This gives multiple reviewers
> -time to comment, gives reviewers across time zones a fair chance to
> -participate, lets you batch feedback together, and gives you time to think
> -through the comments you received. Knowing that you should not immediately send
> -another version also encourages you to review the patches more carefully before
> -sending them, catch small mistakes such as typos and off-by-one errors
> -yourself, and let reviewers spend more of their attention on design,
> -algorithms, and other substantial issues.
> -
> -The right timing depends on the topic and the feedback. Larger series usually
> -need more review time. If the only comments so far are minor, such as typo
> -fixes, it often makes sense to wait a little longer in case deeper reviews are
> -still coming. If the comments call for substantial rework, do not rush out an
> -updated version before you have reviewed the larger changes carefully. Instead,
> -reply to the review that prompted the rewrite, say that you are preparing a
> -substantial rework, and mention which parts of the current series will become
> -obsolete so reviewers can avoid spending time on them until the updated series
> -is ready.
> -
>  
>  [[reviewing]]
>  === Responding to Reviews
>  
> -After a few days, you will hopefully receive a reply to your patchset with some
> -comments. Woohoo! Now you can get back to work.
> -
> -It's good manners to reply to each comment in the mailing list discussion
> -instead of letting the next version of your patch be your only response. Tell
> -the reviewer whether you plan to make the suggested change, keep the original,
> -or pursue a different approach.

This is a sentence we lose in the rewrite, but I'd say that it may be
useful information to retain.

Other than that I don't have any significant things to add, thanks!

Patrick