From nobody Fri Feb 3 16:42:25 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-git@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4P7hK40YF2z3kVxY for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 16:42:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (spindle.one-eyed-alien.net [199.48.129.229]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4P7hK34vSPz3t2w for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 16:42:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (Postfix, from userid 3001) id 4709B3C0199; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 16:42:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 16:42:25 +0000 From: Brooks Davis To: Warner Losh Cc: freebsd-git Subject: Re: Proposed Github Pull Request Policy Message-ID: References: List-Id: Discussion of git use in the FreeBSD project List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-git List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-git@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4P7hK34vSPz3t2w X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:199.48.128.0/22, country:US] X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 07:12:29PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > Geetngs, >=20 > I'd like to put some parameters around the pull requests on github. To th= at > end, I'd like us to consider the following policy: This seems like a good start. > Pull requests shouldn't expand in scope in response to feedback: If the > feedback suggests a new series of changes, please create a new pull > requests. I think I'd prefer: "Pull requests shouldn't expand in scope once created:...". Some direction on using rebase and forced push when addressing feedback is probably also in order. If I'm taking a few minutes to look at a PR that caught my eye I don't want to wade through a bunch of fixups. -- Brooks