Hi Junio,
From: "Junio C Hamano" <gits...@pobox.com>
Christian Couder <christian.cou...@gmail.com> writes:
Goal
~~~~
Totally offtopic, but is it only me who finds these "section
headers" in cover letters from some people irritating and/or
jarring?
Personally I find that, for significant patch series, that clearly breaking
out these distinct sections is of advantage. At this stage (the very first
patch 0/n) there is no specific conversation, so the subject line is a short
'hello' to the topic, and then the contributor is (it is to be hoped)
setting out their proposal in a clear manner.
So I do like these headings for larger series, though there is some
judgement to be made as to when the subject line alone is sufficient.
As a separate follow on, one thing that does annoy me is that in subsequent
versions of the various patch series, folk tend to drop all explanation of
why the series is of any relevance, leaving just the 'changed since last
time' part. This means that new readers who try and pick up / review /
contribute to a series later on in its development are not told the purpose.
When the list is active it can, accidentally, do a disservice to the
potential contributors who may feel that only core contributors are able to
contribute.
Whether this series needed a Goal heading is separate discussion ;-)
.. It perhaps is because I view the cover letter more as a
part of conversation, not a presentation. And when you walk up to
somebody and start a conversation, you do not declare section
headers ;-)
Saying "I want to be able to do these things in the future, and here
is to prepare for that future" at the beginning nevertheless is a
good thing. It gives us readers an overall vision we can agree to
(or be against, or offer alternatives) and sets expectations on what
the series would do and where it stops and leaves the remainder to
follow-up work.
Packet related functions in Perl can be useful to write new filters or
to debug or test existing filters. So instead of having them in
t0021/rot13-filter.pl, let's extract them into a new Git/Packet.pm
module.
I left some comments on individual patches to point out places that
may need improvements. I agree with the overall direction.
Thanks for starting this topic.
--
Philip
