Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] rebase: add documentation and test for --no-rebase-merges

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 11:16:11 -0800

Johannes Schindelin <[email-masked]> writes:

> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Alex Henrie <[email-masked]> writes:
>>
>> > Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <[email-masked]>
>> > ---
>>
>> No cover letter to summarize the changes?
>
> A range-diff would have been nice, too, as well as replying-to the
> previous iteration so that they're all within the same email thread.

Yes, especially the threading would help both those who missed
previous iterations and those who reviewed them.  Range-diff is
often helpful when came with a good summary.  Just like a patch
alone without a good proposed log message is not a good way to help
reviewers understand the issue the patch tries to solve, a cover
with range-diff alone only shows what is different from the previous
iteration, but does not say why the changes were made, so it is not
a good substitute for an explanation by author's words.

I may have suggested GGG if the author appeared a total beginner
with the e-mail workflow (and especially if it were a single-patch
topic), but Alex seems to be doing fine otherwise, and also GGG has
its own learning curve (e.g. it is rare to see a good cover letter
with per-iteration summaries, unless the author is one of those
experienced list regulars), so I left it up to Alex to choose how to
reach the desired end result.

Thanks.