Agreed. :) - Bret ________________________________ From: devel@edk2.groups.io on behalf of Nate DeSimone via groups.io Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 2:35:37 PM To: devel@edk2.groups.io ; lersek@redhat.com ; Bret Barkelew ; spbrogan@outlook.com ; rfc@edk2.groups.io ; Kinney, Michael D ; Leif Lindholm (Nuvia address) ; Andrew Fish Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-rfc] GitHub Pull Request based Code Review Process Hi Laszlo, I think both myself and Bret may have gotten a little chippy. I think both of us are passionate about our work and that shows in the debate. I am happy to forgive Bret and hopefully he is with me as well. Thanks, Nate On 5/19/20, 2:22 PM, "devel@edk2.groups.io on behalf of Laszlo Ersek" wrote: On 05/19/20 21:34, Bret Barkelew wrote: > Nate, I believe you missed Sean’s point. > > Each one of those packages should have been a separate PR. And then we get to wrangle inter-PR dependencies. Even if github.com supports that, it's a heavy-weight tool, and should be used sparingly. Patches in a patch series are almost always inter-dependent in some way, which indicates that many normal patch sets would have to be split into multiple PRs. > Ergo, no information would have been lost in the squash. > > Also, it’s not so much that we *can’t* learn. It’s that we choose not to. Around here, it’s a mark of prestige to not open doors with your face if it seems like there’s a better way. Makes it easier to focus on the work. Wrt. "open doors with your face", which I understand to be a retort to Nate associating prestige with conforming to the current workflow: I think the expression breaks the Code of Conduct: https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tianocore.org%2Fcoc.html&data=02%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C0b810c962b8045eb903108d7fc3c947f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637255209426194060&sdata=2nyvAPNoCddaBkvh9T4uZ5Tt%2Fpnjjwgw96YDoyiPLp8%3D&reserved=0 "Do not insult or put down other participants" (... Before anyone suggests that I did the same when I called maintainers & people en bloc "irrepairably lazy and undisciplined" in my previous mail: that's a fact about humans. People on average perform the minimum of work they can get away with, for satisfying requirements and for reaching goals. It's natural. That's why we have to set high standards. So that covers "lazy". And "undisciplined" (= ignoring rules and good practices) is evidenced frequently, with fixed BZs left open, posted patches not referenced in the BZs they address, BZs ignored / left un-triaged for months and years, pending patches ignored for weeks, reviewed patches left unmerged for days or weeks, etc. I'm not throwing around accusations, just showing that my statement was factual, hardly an insult. OTOH "open doors with your face" is figurative speech, and I do consider it an insult.) Thanks, Laszlo