Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] builtin.h: take over documentation from api-builtin.txt

Martin Ågren [off-list ref] writes:

Since this is my first code contribution to Git, I'll ask about this part of
SubmittingPatches:

"After the list reached a consensus that it is a good idea to apply the
patch, re-send it with "To:" set to the maintainer [*1*] and "cc:" the
list [*2*] for inclusion."

I will boldly assume that I should not be doing this. It seems to me this
doesn't happen very often or not at all -- possibly because you tend to
be involved in virtually all threads anyway, before the list reaches a
consensus.

Yeah, that is in the "ideal patch flow" section, isn't it?  We
rarely achieve the "ideal" and often instead go for a more expedited
option, it appears---perhaps I should try to be less involved in
individual patch reviews and place more review burden on other
reviewers ;-)

In any case, it was a pleasure to cheer-lead on the progress of this
series.  Thanks.

On 4 August 2017 at 18:00, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

Martin Ågren [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Since this is my first code contribution to Git, I'll ask about this part of
SubmittingPatches:

"After the list reached a consensus that it is a good idea to apply the
patch, re-send it with "To:" set to the maintainer [*1*] and "cc:" the
list [*2*] for inclusion."

I will boldly assume that I should not be doing this. It seems to me this
doesn't happen very often or not at all -- possibly because you tend to
be involved in virtually all threads anyway, before the list reaches a
consensus.

Yeah, that is in the "ideal patch flow" section, isn't it?

Yes and no. It's in the main part above it, under "(4) Sending your
patches." But you are right that the ideal patch flow section then
says the same thing: "(4) The list forms consensus that the last
round of your patch is good. Send it to the maintainer and cc the
list."

We
rarely achieve the "ideal" and often instead go for a more expedited
option, it appears---perhaps I should try to be less involved in
individual patch reviews and place more review burden on other
reviewers ;-)

:-)