Hi Junio, On Tue, 30 Jun 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > > >> You could have just told me that the fixup queued on 'seen' looks > >> good to you and squash it in the first step instead to save one > >> roundtrip, but replacing with a new set of three patches is not so > >> bad, either ;-) > > > > To be honest, the GitGitGadget-based workflow makes it quicker for me to > > just submit a new iteration. > > I do not mind seeing a new iteration that gives easier time for > others to comment on the version that is closer to the final than > the previous round. The offer was only for contributors who find > it easier to just say "yeah, I am happy with that change" than > submitting a new round. > > > In fact, I did not even see your fixup until I read your mail. > > This I actually would mind a bit more. The reason why I publish > 'seen' is to make it easier for authors of individual topics how > their work would play with other topics in flight, and it diminishes > the value of it if contributors do not pay attention to what is > queued there. I expect contributors to fetch and look at what is > queued in origin/seen. > > There may be evil merges that reveal subtle interactions between > topics, some of which may involve the topic an author may care > about. There may be fixups for problems that were not found during > review but only found during the integration process. I try to > communicate these back on the list when possible, but the thing is, > a day does not have sufficient number of minutes for me to always do > so. I understand. And I am trying my best to accommodate. Ciao, Dscho > > Thanks. >
