On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 4:44 PM Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 7:27 PM Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 17 Sep 2025, at 19:09, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>>
>> > To be clear, what I was trying to say was not that all the RPC's changes
>> > should be in one PR -- though I think that's easiest for the RPC at this
>> > point -- but rather that as they iterate on a given set of changes they
>> > should be in a single PR.
>>
>> How do you picture those author responses to the PR going? Simply as
>> comments in the PR? Text changes done as commits in the branch that created
>> the PR? Or something else?
>>
>
> Comments to the PR that specify what the authors want clearly and/or
> Github suggestions that specify the exact changes.
>

For those who might not have worked much with PRs before, Github
suggestions allow the author to suggest precise changes, which the PR
creator (the RPC) can then accept.

https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/incorporating-feedback-in-your-pull-request

For example, if an author didn't like one of the RPC's changes, the process
would be:

* RPC proposes change in PR
* Author makes a Github suggestion reverting the change
* RPC accepts and commits the suggestion

The third step is one click in the Github UI, or the RPC can commit a batch
of suggestions all at once.

--Richard


I don't think commits in the branch that created the PR are helpful and
> generally may not be permitted by the GitHub permissions model (depending
> on exactly how things are specified).
>
>
> I ask because I suck at commenting in PRs for documents, and when I do so,
>> I get wildly different advice from the authors about the proper way to
>> comment in a PR. It would be good if the RPC could say to authors ahead of
>> time how the authors should interact with the PR (just as they are told how
>> to respond to AUTH48 email).
>>
>
> Well, hopefully this situation is clearer because the space of reasonable
> comments is rather smaller, as the authors should only be commenting on
> text the RPC has changed, and so mostly you should either be saying "Please
> revert this change" or "Here is yet another alternate piece of text".
>
> Just to be clear, if the authors want to make unsolicited changes beyond
> what the RPC changed, they should be generating their own PRs, not making
> those changes to the RPC's PR.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
>>
>> --Paul Hoffman
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to