[RFC] Patchsets in a single mail? [Re: [PATCH 01/55] Add simple subunit runner outputting subunit v1.]

[Michael Adam]

Hi David,

On 2015-02-15 at 19:13 +0100, David Disseldorp wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2015 11:02:08 +0100, Michael Adam wrote:
> > It simply gives me the creeps that the mail transport
> > path should tamper with my patches which are surely
> > ripped apart (subject in hearder / rest of commit msg
> > and patch in body...). With the attachment alternative
> > the whole patch object is nicely isolated.
> > But that is just my personal pranoia. ;-)
> 
> MITM fudging (by transport or otherwise) is possible in both cases.

Well, if you sign mails, at least fudging of attachments would
not not go unnoticed. With the Mail itself being the git patch
this fudging happens in any case.

> > > While this behaviour is quite spammy (especially when using small
> > > commits, like in Samba), it also:
> > > 
> > >  * makes it easier to follow up on individual commits since you can
> > >    just reply in-line  
> 
> I completely agree with Jelmer here.
> 
> The review process doesn't just involve getting the patch-set to the
> reviewer, more importantly it allows for the reviewer to provide
> feedback for the change, which IMO is best given alongside the context
> of the actual code.

Agreed 100%, but this is possible when you attach
a patchset formatted with "git format-patch --stdout"
as well. :)

> > Well, you can reply inline, too, if you attach the whole
> > patchset to one email. It may require some more scrolling
> > to get to the point though. :-)
> 
> Authors already go to the effort of breaking up changes into manageable
> and reviewable commits, so it makes sense to provide feedback with the
> same granularity.

Well the granularity is not lost if I attach the whole
patchset to a mail. The individual patches are not squashed
or so. But it is possible (in contrast to the one mail per
commit approach) to reply in a broader context.

I can't emphasise enought the point that for me a patchset
sent to the list should be form a logical unit. Some comments
may apply to several patches in the series and may provoke
changes to several commits. This is just intractable for my
poor brain in the multi-mail mode. But I am trying. ;)

Again, I guess we should just continue as is. Everybody sends the
patches the way (s)he likes (single/multi mail). People are just
different, and so are their preferences.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts - Michael
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20150215/eab17038/attachment.pgp>