Re: [edk2-platforms][PATCH v2 2/5] Platform/RPi3/RpiFirmwareDxe: Improve serial number population

["Leif Lindholm" <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>]

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 01:41:20PM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
> It's a disagreement. And the same goes for 3/5 & 4/5. Please see the note I
> wrote in 0/5 for the v2, because the cover letter this is usually the place
> I try to clarify elements that may throw off a maintainer, and that don't
> belong in a commit message.
> 
> Not so sound flippant here, but as long as there isn't an MTV award for
> "Most atomic codebase ever", I just don't have the time to split what I
> consider to be frivolous commits. The reasoning behind that is that I
> realistically don't consider that people are actually going to be thrown off
> by a "while I was here I also fixed an obvious typo" that got added into an
> existing commit or, most important, that even if they do, the amount of time
> that is going to be collectively wasted by people who might be thrown of by
> not having uber atomicity is not going to exceed the amount of time it will
> cost *me* to split it.
>
> Therefore, while I do understand the desire to have an atomic commit
> history, I'm afraid that if we can't strike a balance between how much extra
> time contributors are expected to waste vs how  atomic a *real-life*
> codebase is enforced to be, if I have to split every little typo and
> stylistic fix into yet another commit, I'm simply not going to bother fixing
> typos or low hanging fruits I see any more.

I understand, we all have a limited supply of time.

Since I don't wish to start implementing different rules for different
contributors, could I ask you to stop contributing typo and low
hanging fruit fixes?

Best Regards,

Leif