On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Philip Oakley <philipoak...@iee.org> wrote:
> From: "Felipe Contreras" <felipe.contre...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2013 8:24 AM
>> Clearly, a lot of my patches have not been reviewed properly, so even
>> though they are technically correct, and would benefit users, some have
>> specifically been requested by them, and at least one would
>> significantly improve Git's user interface...
> Given you have put a lot of work into your 16 patch series, is there any
> particular order, or grouping that would help their review.
I ordered them in order of importance, and chance of being merged. For
example, the first patch series 'branch: improve verbose option' is
relatively simple, it improves things significantly, and other
developers have already argued this is the way to go. The last one
'sha1-name: refactor get_sha1() parsing' doesn't have much of a chance
of being merged, it's quite complicated, there isn't any particular
change that is visible to the users, and there isn't probably much
> With so many patches to consider one (the reviewer(s)) gains another task of
> simply trying to prioritise the patches (usually one can take big decisions
> by simply remebering who's series one was interested in).
> I expect the clean-ups and 'trivials's' can be managed separately from the
> 'improvements', which would again be separate from the "satging" and "Ruby"
> philosophical discussions.
Maybe, but the trivial patches have a higher chance of being merged
than 'Massive improvents to rebase and cherry-pick' or 'Support for
Ruby', that's why I put them first.
>> they are going nowhere.
> I wouldn't expect 100% success. Every now and again one hears of the "here's
> some patches I've had in my tree for a while" that probably had the same
> early frustrations - they just feel worse the more you produce.
Yeah, I'm aware of that, I have contributed to lots of open source
projects. However, we are not talking about a couple of patches that
now and again get lost, we are talking about 160 patches, some which
have gone through several (even ten) iterations. I think that is
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html