From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 209.132.183.28, mailfrom: lersek@redhat.com) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by groups.io with SMTP; Mon, 15 Jul 2019 10:48:25 -0700 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D4EB59440; Mon, 15 Jul 2019 17:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-117-21.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.21]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AF9B19C59; Mon, 15 Jul 2019 17:48:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] Simplify edksetup.sh To: Rebecca Cran , devel@edk2.groups.io, leif.lindholm@linaro.org Cc: Bob Feng , Liming Gao , Michael Kinney , Andrew Fish References: <20190710211726.10100-1-rebecca@bsdio.com> <8f3a022b-de01-27b7-d9d3-064eb1bf7232@redhat.com> <7c2a34b2-c582-496e-b5c8-12035432a9fe@bsdio.com> <20190715145521.4nkakcli5rjjjaun@bivouac.eciton.net> <720144d6-20d0-bf18-f00c-e0cddfafd0f5@bsdio.com> From: "Laszlo Ersek" Message-ID: <43230384-37ba-a03c-bc46-23b6403088b9@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:48:21 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <720144d6-20d0-bf18-f00c-e0cddfafd0f5@bsdio.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.39]); Mon, 15 Jul 2019 17:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 07/15/19 17:01, Rebecca Cran wrote: > On 2019-07-15 08:55, Leif Lindholm wrote: >> >> For me, the question is more with being able to trivially discern >> which patch does what. I agree they're all individually trivial, but >> as a single patch there is enough going on at once that it makes it >> easier for bugs to slip through review. (And we've had issues with >> this in the past in edksetup.sh.) > > > > Thanks, I understand now. I'll resubmit the changes as a series. I'm sorry, I shouldn't have followed up, but read Leif's response first -- Leif expressed the same concern that I had, only better, and more politely. :) My apologies for the snark! Thanks Laszlo