From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E81662047F for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 23:02:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751901AbdHGXCd (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Aug 2017 19:02:33 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:51652 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751826AbdHGXCc (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Aug 2017 19:02:32 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C399A2303; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 19:02:25 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=fOdc5NPNDr5JoaOnJVkcl5YUUFg=; b=dDnyx2 KwbSp2Ntvj7f+7X31zH4LbhD98CTWAdhzfSVTBsY5Rf234BcOC32UeNXqIa9ZlfZ IvOhUqqxZpO8JVH6GgBZHFZzHR0elU6kPfpjUzPP1Xm4jpiBtbNUcJ8JGUy34kEc jw75S/+KF9EoebZ7kNOVtIf6BDOnJ99XwGEGE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Xh6bF1HS0YsUWpYF3YPnFtmsNiOwSdDA MLd5u011ttboj3CbDw57PqoQi1IQZ5Ka3ONtjrtHJEU9pSHerJy7OeAOpMrunf+U iY90fyLcmWNyQNp+NFo7tqkIzsRGTo1Ag7zpqyaeDGiBK1LexO82Pen049D+3oKO JDpZ5fcBj/Y= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 753D8A2302; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 19:02:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D92DCA2300; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 19:02:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Martin Koegler , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix delta integer overflows References: <1502129437-31226-1-git-send-email-martin@mail.zuhause> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2017 16:02:23 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Mon, 07 Aug 2017 14:36:59 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7A04B03E-7BC4-11E7-9735-9D2B0D78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > This is not about where the bar is set. It is about expectation.... After having thought about this a bit more, I think in the message I am responding to I mischaracterised the aspect of a patch that influences the "expectation". It is much less about who the contributor is but more about what the patch does. If the patch in question were from a more experienced contributor (like you or Peff), my internal reaction would have been "gee, the submitter should have known better that a more complete fix should involve a larger integral type, not stopping at matching the largest type that happens to be used in the interface without updating the interface". But I still would have said that the patch is an improvement--as it indeed is; it does not make things worse anywhere and brings in a more consistency. And I still would have mentioned the same "in the longer term, we would want to use size_t or uintmax_t here, not just ulong". The only thing I would have done differently if the submission were by a more experienced contributor is that I probably would have added "yes this may be an improvement, but I expected you should know better to at least mention the longer term direction to use size_t or uintmax_t in the log message, even if you didn't immediately extend this patch into a more complete series". That one is a difference of expectation between an occasional contributor and an experienced one.