Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > ... I always assumed that you did one of: > > 1. Comment on the patch via email, just as any other reviewer, so it > can go into the re-roll. > > 2. Fix-up the patch or commit message during "am", with the assumption > that it is ready to be merged at least to "next", at which point > re-rolls are no longer OK, anyway. Not really. I usually amend patches queued to 'pu' (or queue fixup! separately) when I am reasonably confident that my suggestion had enough merits. Also I roll in suggestions that are obviously (to me) good from the list, which may or may not be the same to the list concensus. Maybe I should try to be less aggressive. > I mentioned "it takes effort" above. I don't mean "submitters shouldn't > be expected to put in extra effort". But we should make sure the effort > is well-spent, which means: > > 1. Giving them some indication that you tweaked things during > application. It doesn't have to be an inclusive list. Even saying > "Thanks, applied with some spelling fixes" instead of your usual > "Thanks" is enough (actually, I think you frequently do so > already). Just started consciously doing so yesterday, after starthing this offtopic therad ;-) -- 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