From 12040177bcfc59d7757abdcd6ae654cd52d0d559 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2026 09:06:09 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] SubmittingPatches: address design critiques Contributors sometimes fail to answer fundamental design or viability comments from reviewers and submit subsequent rounds without addressing them. When design decisions are resolved on the mailing list, the final justification should be recorded in the commit messages. Instruct authors to be particularly mindful of critiques regarding high-level design or viability, to defend their choices on the list, and to accompany new iterations with clearer explanations in the cover letter, responses, and revised commit messages. Also instruct them to explicitly document the resolution of these concerns in the commit message body to keep the historical record complete. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches index f042bb5aaf..a9789e5303 100644 --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches @@ -51,6 +51,21 @@ area. respond to them with "Reply-All" on the mailing list, while taking them into account while preparing an updated set of patches. + +Be particularly mindful of critiques regarding the high-level design +or viability of your proposal (e.g., questioning if the feature is +worth implementing, or if the chosen approach is appropriate). Defend +your design decisions on the list first, work with reviewers and other +members to improve the design before revising the implementation, to +avoid wasting effort on an implementation before its design is solid. ++ +Make sure that any new version explains and justifies those design +decisions more clearly, in the cover letter and in the revised commit +messages. Aim to make the reviewers say "it is now clear why we may +want to do this with the updated version". ++ +Topics with unresolved fundamental design critiques will not be +considered ready for merging. ++ It is often beneficial to allow some time for reviewers to provide feedback before sending a new version, rather than sending an updated series immediately after receiving a review. This helps collect broader @@ -323,6 +338,10 @@ The body should provide a meaningful commit message, which: . alternate solutions considered but discarded, if any. +. records the resolution of design or viability concerns raised by the + community during the review, if any, ensuring the historical record + explains why the chosen approach was accepted over alternatives. + [[present-tense]] The problem statement that describes the status quo is written in the present tense. Write "The code does X when it is given input Y",