Paul Tan <pyoka...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Matthieu Moy > <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote: > >> About the timeline: I'd avoid too much parallelism. Usually, it's best >> to try to send a first patch to the mailing list as soon as possible, >> hence focus on one point first (I'd do that with pull, since that's the >> one which is already started). Then, you can parallelize coding on git >> am and the discussion on the pull patches. Whatever you plan, review and >> polishing takes more than that ;-). The risk is to end up with an almost >> good but not good enough to be mergeable code. That said, your timeline >> does plan patches and review early, so I'm not too worried. >> > > Well, I was thinking that after the full rewrite (2nd stage, halfway > through the project), any optimizations made to the code will be done > iteratively (and in separate small patches)
Yes, that's why I'm not too worried. But being able to say "this part is done, it won't disturb me anymore" ASAP is still good IMHO, even if "this part" is not so big. But again, I'm thinking out loudly, feel free to ignore. >> A general advice: if time allows, try to contribute to discussions and >> review other than your own patches. It's nice to feel integrated in the >> community and not "the GSoC student working alone at home" ;-). > > Yeah I apologize for not participating in the list so actively because > writing the git-pull prototype and the proposal took a fair chunk of > my time. Don't apologize, you're doing great. I'm only pointing out things that could be "even better", but certainly not blaming you! -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
