On 05/01/2014 10:37 PM, Ronnie Sahlberg wrote: > This patch series is based on next and expands on the transaction API. [...]
Meta-comment: Ronnie, It seems like successive versions of this patch series are growing not only in maturity but also in breadth. That makes it harder to review them. I, for one, would prefer that a patch series cover a roughly fixed set of changes [1], so that all of the patches in a version of the series are at roughly the same level of maturity. That way, the whole series can progress from "is this a good idea?" to "is the implementation correct?" to "are all the details right?" at roughly the same time, and then Junio can merge the branch, locking in that bit of progress. While this is happening, other series can be making their way through other stages of the pipeline. When new patches are added to an old series, then they delay the merge of the older patches, even if those are ripe. Plus, it makes it harder for reviewers to keep track of the maturity level of each patch and to read off how the older patches have changed. It makes the patch series a moving target. There's no need to re-split this patch series, but please take this wish into account in the future. Thanks, Michael [1] Of course, if a patch series has to grow to make the *existing* changes correct, then that's perfectly OK. -- Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/ -- 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
