Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

Well, both of us forgot that the previous round has already been in
'next' for quite a while.

So, I've split the difference between the previous round and the
result of applying this round into two patches, and then added a bit
of fix-ups on top. ...

Sorry about that (but also, I didn't know any better). So I guess the
guidance is:

    Sometimes, you may want to work on a topic (typically your own)
    which has already been in `next` for quite a while. Perhaps you had
    an unplanned break of a couple weeks, or some other circumstance. In
    such cases, consider sending out patches that build on top of the
    latest patch series round instead of directly modifying (locally
    rebasing) the patches for a new series. This way, your new changes
    will be easier to apply to `next` as is, without rebuilding `next`
    all over again.

Would you prefer to include this guidance in the docs as well, or is it
sufficiently rare enough that we shouldn't include it?