Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> In my mind that's better than a "LGTM" or "Reviewed-by". Those are both >> versions of "I looked over your work", but if you independently come up >> with the same thing that's usually a stronger sign that the proposed >> solution is a good one. > > Not necessarily. > > Past effort that did not fare well needs to be re-examined to make > sure it was not picked up because it was crappy, because two people > independently coming up with the same crappiness does not help us > build more confidence. Instead of forcing other reviewers waste > their time looking at older threads, it would help to explain what > you find good in the patch you are reviewing. Related to this, another thing you often do is very helpful: to say that the patch being proposed solves the same problem another patch that is already in our tree solved in a different part of the code base. If it was good for another part of the system, it is likely that the same solution may be a good fit for the part being touched as well. Compared to that, referring to an earlier patch that failed to hit our code base is not all that helpful. Thanks.
