Mario Frasca writes: > On 30/05/2020 16:29, Mario Frasca wrote: >> I hope to be back soon with a single commit... > > one doubt. what's the point of having me squash all in a single commit, > when I do not have write access to the repository?
To provide me or another committer with a polished, final state to apply, along with a commit message that follows the convention mentioned at <https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contribute.html> and ideally explains why the change should be applied. (The rationale you sent in your first message could be adapted for this.) You've been sending a diff, presumably from the point you branched off of to the tip of your branch. In that case, you're already presenting each iteration you've sent as one change; it just lacks a commit message. Just for clarity: In this case, I think the change proposed so far makes sense to present as a single commit. I'm not claiming that in general a patch series should be reduced to _one_ commit. > if we were on github, I would be working on a pull request, which > would have a description and a title, and contain several commits. If I were reviewing a pull request from you, I would still request that you not pile fixup commits on top and that you instead rewrite/polish the series to address feedback. People have strong opinions in both directions on this, and I hope this thread doesn't derail into a discussion of those. My point is just that this workflow is not unique to mailing list patch submission.
