|
From: | Mario Frasca |
Subject: | Re: `with` as a list. |
Date: | Sun, 31 May 2020 20:47:52 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.1 |
On 31/05/2020 19:19, Kyle Meyer wrote:
You've been sending a diff, presumably from the point you branched off of to the tip of your branch. In that case, you're already presenting each iteration you've sent as one change; it just lacks a commit message.
right, that's indeed what I did, and this is also what I thought, so no need to rebase, squash or whatever, as long as I make sure that the diff I'm sending you is about this single issue, and let's agree on the commit message, because after all I'm adding a function to a software I don't really know.
I hope to send an updated patch soon, that will also include the docs.I have no strong opinion on workflows, just trying to understand the one used here.
btw: if I had write permissions to the repositories, I would be adding test cases, and reviewing the docstrings, some of which I find misleading. your remark on setf/setq could also be addressed in the code. and some of the code ought to be refactored, as to allow for unit tests.
ciao, MF
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |