Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/PartitionDxe: Revert the child handler blocksize change

["Gao, Zhichao" <zhichao.gao@intel.com>]

I used to collect the RB and send the finial patch to the maintainers to merge before. I keep that behavior since the PR process. Thanks for notice me the incorrect process. I would let the maintainers do this in the future.
About the comment not to send another patch to community and take the RB after change base on the comment, I would give the changed personal fork branch for final review and keep all the CCers noticed.

Thanks,
Zhichao

> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Laszlo Ersek
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2020 8:27 PM
> To: Gao, Zhichao <zhichao.gao@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Ni, Ray
> <ray.ni@intel.com>; glin@suse.com
> Cc: Wu, Hao A <hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D
> <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/PartitionDxe: Revert the child
> handler blocksize change
> 
> On 10/21/20 03:33, Gao, Zhichao wrote:
> > Hi Laszlo,
> >
> > Apologize for the patch merge thing. That is my fault. Base on your comments,
> I update the commit message with revert info and part of my V1 commit
> message. And I am thinking there is no other doubt with the reverting.
> Sometimes the maintainers and reviewers my give the change comment and let
> the submitter not to send the patch again because the change is tiny.
> 
> Indeed this is very common, but it is always agreed upon beforehand.
> 
> > I treat this patch as that condition incorrectly. That's why I contact Ray to
> review the new commit message and help to push directly if he is OK with it.
> Sorry for missing you in the process.
> 
> Another problem is that the PR itself has to be created by the maintainer.
> 
> https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EDK-II-Development-
> Process#the-maintainer-process-for-the-edk-ii-project
> 
> As I understand it, the current process does not permit a contributor to create a
> PR, and a maintainer to just set the "push" label on that PR.
> 
> Thanks
> Laszlo
> 
> 
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Zhichao
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 5:53 PM
> >> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com>; Gao, Zhichao
> >> <zhichao.gao@intel.com>; glin@suse.com
> >> Cc: Wu, Hao A <hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D
> >> <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/PartitionDxe: Revert
> >> the child handler blocksize change
> >>
> >> Ray,
> >>
> >> On 10/19/20 07:56, Ni, Ray wrote:
> >>> Zhichao,
> >>> Can you please update the commit message to address Laszlo's comments?
> >>
> >> why did you merge <https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1033>?
> >>
> >> PR#1033 was originally submitted as a personal build for Zhichao.
> >> When it passed CI (and was auto-closed), Zhichao should have posted
> >> the updated patch (with the cleaned up commit message) as v2 to the
> >> mailing list, for the next round of review.
> >>
> >> Instead, you reopened the (auto-closed) PR, added the push label, and
> >> the mergify bot merged the patch. You merged a patch that was not
> >> reviewed on the list; specifically you didn't give me any chance to
> >> re-check the commit message, after I pointed out problems with it
> >> under the v1 thread. Of course, sometimes we (participants in a patch
> >> review
> >> thread) agree that the maintainer will perform some final (small)
> >> updates just before merging the patch or series, but in this case,
> >> that has not happened -- no specific wording was proposed or accepted in the
> thread, as far as I can see.
> >>
> >> Regardin the timeline: as of this writing, Zhichao opened PR#1033
> >> eight hours ago, and you made the mergify bot merge the (unreviewed) patch
> 4 hours ago.
> >> That is, you just wanted to get rid of it as quickly as possible,
> >> without any regard to the community (again -- I provided
> >> *specific* feedback under v1).
> >>
> >> This urgency is especially appalling when contrasted with your and
> >> Eric's total lack of feedback for Tom Lendacky's patch
> >>
> >>   [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 1/1]
> >>   UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Reduce reset vector memory pressure
> >>
> >>   https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/65540
> >>
> >> for almost a *month*. I had to merge that patch yesterday out of
> >> desperation and embarrassment for your behaviors, with only my R-b
> >> added. You forced me to break the development process in order not to
> alienate a prolific contributor.
> >> All one of you had to do was post an Acked-by.
> >>
> >> You can't make a contributor wait for this long, and you also can't
> >> sneak in patches without public review (or at least public agreement
> >> about the final touch- ups). If you can't do maintenance responsibly,
> >> for any reason, then *quit*; let someone else become maintainer.
> >>
> >> This behavior is a hallmark of the edk2 project not having a healthy
> >> open source community. Sad.
> >>
> >> Laszlo
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
>