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

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>

Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 18:01:02 UTC

Severity: important

Done: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #307 received at 65924-done <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: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 65924-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#65924: git searches coreutils and util-linux commands in PATH
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2023 15:44:31 -0400
Hello,

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

> Am Montag, dem 09.10.2023 um 15:25 -0400 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer:
>> 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.
> I personally prefer to comment to all individual patches or use the
> series starter for "this series LGTM", but to recap; 1 and 2 L'd GTM
> (with a small caveat for 1) already and we discussed 3 in IRC, so LGTM
> for the series.

That's a good idea.

Thanks for the heads-up!  I've now installed this series to
core-updates.  Closing!

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim




This bug report was last modified 1 year and 216 days ago.

Previous Next


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