public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@gmail.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	computersforpeace@gmail.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, corbet@lwn.net,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/4] Documentation: Provide suggestions on when to repost patches
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:13:19 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141215101319.GA6444@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1418623790-28429-5-git-send-email-cernekee@gmail.com>

On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 10:09:50PM -0800, Kevin Cernekee wrote:
> Give submitters a rough idea of how long to wait before reposting, to
> help avoid situations where a series is reposted before the original
> submission is fully reviewed.
> 
> Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@gmail.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/development-process/6.Followthrough | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/development-process/6.Followthrough b/Documentation/development-process/6.Followthrough
> index 41d324a..6cefb6c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/development-process/6.Followthrough
> +++ b/Documentation/development-process/6.Followthrough
> @@ -74,7 +74,10 @@ around.
>  One fatal mistake is to ignore review comments in the hope that they will
>  go away.  They will not go away.  If you repost code without having
>  responded to the comments you got the time before, you're likely to find
> -that your patches go nowhere.
> +that your patches go nowhere.  On the flipside, reposting an updated patch
> +before the original has been fully reviewed can be a source of frustration
> +too,

I'd like to make that aspect stronger/more explicit:

"Please do repost only after the reviewers have finished going through
your submission and you have collected, addressed and/or incorporated
their full feedback. You can use the time while waiting to test and
hammer more on your code. Any non-trivial submission of a patchset
should be resent after a full week (7 days) the earliest in order not to
spam people unnecessarily and to give them a chance to at least finish
reviewing."

Anyway, something like that, formulation might need more cleaning up - I
was just trying to express the sentiment...

> so consider giving the reviewers ~3-7 calendar days (depending on
> +patch complexity) before posting V2.
>  
>  Speaking of reposting code: please bear in mind that reviewers are not
>  going to remember all the details of the code you posted the last time

Thanks for doing this, btw!

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--

  reply	other threads:[~2014-12-15 10:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-15  6:09 [RFC 0/4] Stop maintainer abuse Kevin Cernekee
2014-12-15  6:09 ` [RFC 1/4] Documentation: Change policy on sending patches during merge window Kevin Cernekee
2014-12-15  8:29   ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-12-15  6:09 ` [RFC 2/4] Documentation/SubmitChecklist: Remind submitters to check the " Kevin Cernekee
2014-12-15 10:17   ` Borislav Petkov
2014-12-16  6:48   ` Kalle Valo
2014-12-15  6:09 ` [RFC 3/4] Documentation: Add cutoff periods for patch acceptance Kevin Cernekee
2014-12-15 10:15   ` Borislav Petkov
2014-12-15 14:59   ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-12-15 18:29     ` Linus Torvalds
2014-12-15  6:09 ` [RFC 4/4] Documentation: Provide suggestions on when to repost patches Kevin Cernekee
2014-12-15 10:13   ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2014-12-16 18:09 ` [RFC 0/4] Stop maintainer abuse Jonathan Corbet
2014-12-16 20:35   ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-12-16 22:19   ` Kevin Cernekee
2014-12-16 22:31     ` Borislav Petkov
2014-12-17  5:14       ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-12-17  9:52         ` Borislav Petkov
2014-12-18 19:05           ` Mark Brown
2014-12-18 10:35   ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-18 10:42     ` Borislav Petkov
2014-12-18 10:53       ` Paolo Bonzini

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=20141215101319.GA6444@pd.tnic \
    --to=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cernekee@gmail.com \
    --cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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