Re: Git pull ack emails..

[Takashi Iwai]

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 11:02:45 +0200,
Willy Tarreau wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 09:41:32AM +0100, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Because yes, the second option likely works fine in most cases, but my
> > pull might not actually be final *if* something goes bad (where  bad
> > might be just "oops, my tests showed a semantic conflict, I'll need to
> > fix up my merge" to "I'm going to have to look more closely at that
> > warning" to "uhhuh, I'm going to just undo the pull entirely because
> > it ended up being broken").
> 
> Is that a big problem ? I mean probably those who need an ACK just want
> to be sure their PR was not lost between them and you. It's not a guarantee
> that the code will be kept till the release anyway, and I tend to think
> that changing your mind after attempting a build is not different than
> changing your mind 3 days later. So when this happens, you're possibly
> expected to simply notify the author later saying "sorry, I changed my
> mind and finally I dropped your code for this or that reason". That
> should be enough to cover the vast majority of use cases, no ?

Agreed, the ACK mail doesn't necessarily mean that everything right,
but just ACK that the pull request is being processed.  The e-mail
communication can go wrong pretty easily (happened once or twice for
my past PR's), so a simple ACK would relieve me wrt that point -- as
Greg's ACK did indeed.


thanks,

Takashi