Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Rename remote_only to display_mode

From: Andreas Ericsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 11:51:39 +0100

Andy Parkins wrote:
> Digressing a little: what is the polite form of patches for git?  My strategy 
> with this set was to make each patch as small as possible to reach my end 
> point.  If those patches were okayed on the list, I could then do a "make 
> more beautiful" patch, which is really nothing to do with the original 
> changes to functionality but would make the code prettier.

I believe the order of preferrence goes: tested, concise, short.

Linus has a nasty habit of ending his mails with "totally untested 
ofcourse", which is not a good strategy to adopt if you want your 
patches included.

>  Really I'm asking 
> what level of intrusiveness of patch is not considered rude?  In making my 
> patches, should I ride rough-shod over current implementation and just do it 
> how I'd do it or should I try to fit in (as I did in this case)?
> 

If you *need* to change something, change it. If you *want* to change 
something just because it's not written the way you would write it, back 
away. If you think some interface you're using needs clearing up 
(codewise or with extra comments), send a separate patch for that so the 
actual feature/bugfix you're sending in doesn't drown in cosmetic 
changes to the interfaces the patch uses/touches.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   [email-masked]
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se