Hi Junio and Eric, On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 10:34:48AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > It may not be too much work for you to keep adding more (unrelated) > > changes to a series, but doing so increases the burden on reviewers > > unnecessarily, especially for a long patch series such as this one. > > Generally speaking, each iteration should help the series converge to > > the point at which it can finally land (be merged to "next"). Thus, > > ideally, each iteration should have fewer changes than the previous > > one. Sorry for expanding the burden I've been putting on you. I really appreciate the effort both of you have been putting in reviewing my work and I'll make sure to not make it any harder than necessary for any reviewers in the future. > > Yup. It is too easy to paint an ongoing series with a brush that is > broader than necessary and say "this is to clean up", and fall into > a never-ending run of scope expansion, as there always is yet > another thing to clean up. The focus of the series has been to > ensure that we catch error exit from "git" and that script conforms > to the style guidelines, and does not include hash migration. > > Let's resist the urge to expand the scope. I see that Eric's already reviewed the changes from this round (thanks, Eric) so I don't want his work to go to waste. But I won't change the scope from this point forward. Sorry again for the extra burden, Denton > > Thanks. > >
