Re: `with` as a list.

[Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>]

Mario Frasca writes:

> On 30/05/2020 16:29, Mario Frasca wrote:
>> I hope to be back soon with a single commit... 
>
> one doubt.  what's the point of having me squash all in a single commit, 
> when I do not have write access to the repository? 

To provide me or another committer with a polished, final state to
apply, along with a commit message that follows the convention mentioned
at <https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contribute.html> and ideally explains
why the change should be applied.  (The rationale you sent in your first
message could be adapted for this.)  You've been sending a diff,
presumably from the point you branched off of to the tip of your branch.
In that case, you're already presenting each iteration you've sent as
one change; it just lacks a commit message.

Just for clarity: In this case, I think the change proposed so far makes
sense to present as a single commit.  I'm not claiming that in general a
patch series should be reduced to _one_ commit.

> if we were on github, I would be working on a pull request, which
> would have a description and a title, and contain several commits. 

If I were reviewing a pull request from you, I would still request that
you not pile fixup commits on top and that you instead rewrite/polish
the series to address feedback.  People have strong opinions in both
directions on this, and I hope this thread doesn't derail into a
discussion of those.  My point is just that this workflow is not unique
to mailing list patch submission.