Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/17] am: counteract gender bias

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2016 09:03:11 -0700

Johannes Schindelin <[email-masked]> writes:

> Hi Junio,
>
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Johannes Schindelin <[email-masked]> writes:
>> 
>> >> I doubt this kind fo distraction is desirable in the middle of a
>> >> seriously heavy series like this one.  As a standalone clean-up to
>> >> turn these directly to "their" that everybody would agree on and can
>> >> be merged down quickly to 'master' that does not have to keep the
>> >> body of the main topic waiting for the dust to settle might be a
>> >> better approach.
>> >>  ...
>> > I am really curious, though. Has it not been our practice to encourage
>> > preparatory patches like white-space or const fixes as part of patch
>> > series that touch a certain part of the code that needed fixing?
>> 
>> Yes, isn't that "preparatory clean-up" what I said "might be a
>> better approach"?
>
> What I meant by "preparatory clean-up" is a patch in the patch series,
> just as I had it.
>
> Now it is a separate patch "series".

The main thing I had trouble with was to have it in the middle at
11/17.  Since I do not have time to reorder other people's patches,
every time you reroll the main series, this step will need to be
looked at together with others.  Having it near the beginning as
preparatory clean-up, or even better a separate series that is an
uncontroversial preparatory clean-up that the main topic depends on,
is what I meant.

You build the main "series" on top of what 'master' would have when
the separate one that "does not have to keep the body of the main
topic waiting" gets merged.  Because the separate one would be
something "everybody would agree on and can be merged down quickly",
that will not slow the main topic down.