GNU bug report logs - #65924
git searches coreutils and util-linux commands in PATH

Previous Next

Full log

Message #299 received at 65924 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 65924 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#65924: git searches coreutils and util-linux commands in PATH
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2023 15:25:53 -0400

Hi Liliana,

Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Am Montag, dem 09.10.2023 um 14:21 -0400 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>> > [...]
>> > If you need me to reduce it to four letters, yes, LGTM.
>> 
>> Explicit is better than implicit.  I've been thinking to document
>> this in our contributing section; e.g. a reviewed commit must have
>> the 'LGTM' from the reviewer.  If a series is LGTM, it needs to be
>> implicitly mentioned with 'this series LGTM'.  That may sound silly,
>> but I think it'd simplify reviewer/submitters interactions.
> s/implicitly/explicitly/?

Explicit, indeed.

> I don't necessarily agree, but it's not a hard disagree either.  I'll
> try to keep that in mind at least when reviewing your patches to not
> cause confusion.

OK.  One place where this becomes more important is when the send-email
cc hook includes people partially to a series. A LGTM on a single
message in this case could be misinterpreted for the whole series.  It's
best to document the expectations and codify these often used signals,
in my opinion.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.