Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> +Some reviewers (notably testers) would like to know at what point your patchset
> +are based on (in particular to apply the patchset). In such cases, you can
> +mention the base point when preparing your email (see below section), or by
> +passing `--base=$(git merge-base master psuh)` to `format-patch`. If no base
> +point is specified, the patchset is assumed to be applied on top of current
> +tip of `master` branch.
This document is about contributing to _this_ project, so I think we
can and should be more explicit to say what is preferred, not "some
would like to know, and in such a case you give this extra piece",
as by definition, somebody who is making their first contribution
would not know whether the reviewer who looks at your work is among
these "some" or not.
It would help those who review and test your patches to make it
clear on what commit they are meant to apply. To do so, use the
"--base" option to record the commit on which you based the
series when running "git format-patch".
If no base is given, what is assumed by default various by
recipient, so all we could say is "If no base is specified, nothing
is assumed", but let's rather not say anything to confuse the
readers.
We could say what we want to see the first-time contributors do,
but I do not think it is needed in this case.
Side note. We want a new feature to be built on 'master' (or
the last feature release, if nothing in flight conflicts
with it)), and a bugfix to be built on one of the older
release point (to be applicable to the maintenance tracks).
But the section we are discussing, i.e. how to run
format-patch, is not the place to do so, as it is too
late---it must be decided before the contributor starts
working on the series. As the example of this document is
about adding a new "feature", we should have a sentence to
explain, in the "Set up your workspace" section, why we
chose 'master' as the base point (and the existing text
already says why).
Thanks.
