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

["Pete Batard" <pete@akeo.ie>]

On 2019.10.10 17:49, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> 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?

I'm fine with that.

Regards,

/Pete

> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Leif
>