Hi Michael, Michael J Gruber writes: > Ramkumar Ramachandra venit, vidit, dixit 06.04.2011 20:09: > > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> I'm very sorry to have caused so much pain. Yes, I can imagine how > >>> terrible it must be to review several iterations of a simple > >>> documentation patch. Thank you for being so patient with me so far- I > >>> understand if you don't want to do this anymore. > >>> > >>> I do spend time proofreading patches before sending them out, but I'm > >>> clearly not very good at it. In future, I'll either try rewriting > >>> entire paragraphs or simply refrain from writing documentation patches. > >> > >> I do not think that is the lesson you should learn from this exchange. A > >> major part of Michael's complaint (which I think was justified) was that > >> he even made a suggestion that is ready to be cut-and-pasted, but your > >> reroll does not use the suggested phrasing _without_ explaining why it > >> doesn't. > >> > >> It is not limited to "documentation patches". If you get a "how about > >> doing it this way---isn't it cleaner?" suggestion to your code patch, you > >> at least owe either "yeah, that looks better---thanks, I've used it in > >> this reroll" or "no, because...; I've used the original" to the person who > >> tried to help you, no? > > > > I completely agree -- all of Michael's suggestions were excellent, and > > I'd definitely owe him an explanation for not using something. In > > this particular case, it was an honest mistake though- I meant to > > include Michael's version, but I'd rolled out the wrong commit after > > rebasing. > > Ram, all is well (explained) now, and please don't give up on > documentation patches. You see, it happened to me again and again that I > submitted something, and someone took over the initiative or the idea > and submitted something under his name. And that is completely OK (after > all I had signed off on my patch, it's part of the O in OSS) but > "deprives" the original submitter of the "reward" of having the commit > count incremented. And that is what I wanted to spare you by not > submitting my own version. Cool, thanks for understanding and bearing with my slopiness :p Yes, I strongly believe that we should spend time writing reviews, even if it's quicker to redo the series entirely* -- that's how we can get more contributors :) * This is often the case with inexperienced contributors -- Ram -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html