<div dir="ltr"><div><div class="gmail_extra"><div>Thanks Norbert and Thorsten for great responses. All makes sense.<br><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Thorsten Behrens <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:thb@documentfoundation.org" target="_blank">thb@documentfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>Ashod Nakashian wrote:<br>
> This is a point I'd like to address. At certain times jenkins acts<br>
> up and fails builds randomly.<br>
><br>
</span>Sure, happens (and sometimes master is broken on certain platforms) -<br>
but as I said, just rebase your patch then to force a new<br>
build. Perhaps check <a href="http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">tinderbox.libreoffice.org</a>, if all platforms are<br>
green before.<br>
<span><br>
> I make every effort to submit only patches that fully build _and_ work.<br>
><br>
</span>Careful with those absolutes<br>
(c.f. <a href="https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/17194/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/17194/</a>) ;)<br>
<span><br></span></blockquote><div><br>Thorsten, I think you're being a bit unfair with that example :) Although your point is well taken.<br><br>If
anything, it shows how careful I am with what I submit (although I
really didn't mean to push that one, I didn't think it worthwhile to
abandon it either... notice how soon I reverted?).<br><br>In fact, it's a perfect example of how I
reduce my commits to bare minimum, when they are not relevant to the
fix, but good hygiene (that can/should go separately).<br><br></div><div>Thanks.<br></div><div><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>
> I spend a tremendous amount of time to test and commit the bare<br>
> minimum change (sometimes not all changes are necessary to fix an<br>
> issue and can be a distraction in reviewing/bisecting/etc, so I<br>
> remove them).<br>
><br>
</span>That is definitely good advise.<br>
<span><br>
> So again I'm confused: how should I make it clear that my patches<br>
> aren't experiments rather they are of reasonably high-quality and<br>
> ready for serious review?<br>
><br>
</span>So I think that's a non-issue here, I wouldn't overly bother (also<br>
c.f. your 'frequent rebase' statement). See also Norbert's answer for<br>
why things might be a bit slower currently, and my tip on how to poke<br>
individual reviewers for a conversation.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
-- Thorsten<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>