On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 12:04:35PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | So if it is not really controversial why do point it out? Because you > | think Georg judgment is not enough? > > Actually I think must of you (all) (including me) does not think about > patches in the 'self-contained-as-small-as-usefull-but-no-smaller' > way.
No. The problem is exactly what Abdel already mentioned: There's nothing wrong with a three line patch and people would be happy to commit such. However, waiting two full days for a review of a three line patch and continue only after this is clearly not acceptable. It is also not acceptable to keep a copy of a full source tree for every pending three line patch. > I am not sure that my split up of r14281 is a good example (I might > have split it into too many pieces there), but it is not far off. You probably never had the problem of needing to wait for review. You could just try to get an idea of this feeling if you impose a delay of two days on every patch you want to commit. I am pretty sure you will see things in a different light in the end. Andre'
