morluto/rea

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/morluto/rea.git synced 2026-11-05 06:45:22 +00:00

[GH-ISSUE #7488] [Docs] Clarify coordination for overlapping fixes while a PR awaits review #4459

New issue

Open

opened 2026-10-31 00:50:01 +00:00 by bsakaguchi · 1 comment

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-31 00:50:01 +00:00

Owner

Originally created by @ShuaixinHuang on GitHub (Oct 27, 2026).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/morluto/rea/issues/7488

Before submitting

I searched the existing issues for a related documentation report.
I removed credentials, tokens, private paths, and sensitive target data.

Documentation location

CONTRIBUTING.md: pull request ownership and readiness and the contribution workflow discussed in #7243.

Problem

Thanks for the recent reviews and fixes, and for clarifying in #7243 that the final diff still needs review and a reliable review date cannot be promised. I have a separate workflow question: how should contributors coordinate an open contribution with an overlapping change merged later?

While PRs await review, subsequent upstream changes can require additional conflict resolution and CI verification. When an overlapping fix lands, contributors also need to establish which parts remain useful. This creates maintenance work for both contributors and reviewers; I am asking about coordination rather than assuming why a particular PR was selected.

Expected content

Proposed clarification: when a pending PR is superseded, link the overlapping commit back to it and indicate whether the contributor should rebase, narrow or close it. Is there a preferred way to flag a potential overlap early, so contributors can redirect effort before maintaining both versions?

Supporting evidence

My #7062 was submitted on October 25. Its Markdown correction was subsequently covered by 6d7e6277. I temporarily closed it on October 27 and have since reopened it so its disposition can be agreed with the maintainer. Its current conflict status must be checked before any merge.

Additional context

The five contributions tracked for this CI update are #7063, #7065, #7349, #7356 and #7357. The reopened #7062 is also still open.

Verified at 10/27/2026 08:35:11: all five latest heads have successful required code CI and independent packet-capture checks. Title and initial author-readiness checks also pass, and GitHub reports no merge conflicts for these five. They remain open for maintainer review. | PR | Latest head | Required code CI | Independent packet capture | | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| #7063 | f5f6f88a | success | success |
| #7065 | da988cdc | success | success |
| #7349 | 57136e6f | success | success |
| #7356 | bd19f1e0 | success | success |
| #7357 | ffe27cd3 | success | success |

The three initial human-owner declarations are filled for each of these five. These checks and declarations do not establish maintainer approval or permission to merge. Latest status update (2026-10-27T11:41:00.7785151Z): all six open PRs now have updated heads and GitHub reports no merge conflicts. The upstream #7479 test-fixture change required the same small alignment on five branches; #7062 also received targeted fixture corrections and a model identity regression update. Their new required CI runs are queued or running. The green results in the timestamped table above belong to the earlier heads, and are not evidence that these latest heads have passed. Current heads: #7062 5cf98e2c, #7063 338cf3cc, #7065 caa0734e, #7349 5733ebdd, #7356 2ac251b3, #7357 5e004ed5.

I have additional fixes to contribute and would appreciate documented guidance that reduces repeated synchronization. This question focuses on overlap handling; the review-time and queue questions already raised in #7243 do not need repeating here.

Repeated upstream changes while these contributions await review mean repeatedly resolving overlaps, updating the same branches and running validation again. This consumes substantial maintenance time for both contributors and reviewers. I would appreciate timely review and a clear decision on what should be merged, changed, narrowed or closed, so that effort can go into further useful contributions.

Originally created by @ShuaixinHuang on GitHub (Oct 27, 2026). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/morluto/rea/issues/7488 ### Before submitting - [x] I searched the existing issues for a related documentation report. - [x] I removed credentials, tokens, private paths, and sensitive target data. ### Documentation location [CONTRIBUTING.md: pull request ownership and readiness](https://github.com/morluto/rea/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#pull-request-ownership-and-readiness) and the contribution workflow discussed in [#7243](https://github.com/morluto/rea/issues/7243#issuecomment-6428674792). ### Problem Thanks for the recent reviews and fixes, and for clarifying in #7243 that the final diff still needs review and a reliable review date cannot be promised. I have a separate workflow question: how should contributors coordinate an open contribution with an overlapping change merged later? While PRs await review, subsequent upstream changes can require additional conflict resolution and CI verification. When an overlapping fix lands, contributors also need to establish which parts remain useful. This creates maintenance work for both contributors and reviewers; I am asking about coordination rather than assuming why a particular PR was selected. ### Expected content Proposed clarification: when a pending PR is superseded, link the overlapping commit back to it and indicate whether the contributor should rebase, narrow or close it. Is there a preferred way to flag a potential overlap early, so contributors can redirect effort before maintaining both versions? ### Supporting evidence My [#7062](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7062) was submitted on October 25. Its Markdown correction was subsequently covered by [6d7e6277](https://github.com/morluto/rea/commit/6d7e6277835448bcdc830d00ebced2ff76a74c92). I temporarily closed it on October 27 and have since reopened it so its disposition can be agreed with the maintainer. Its current conflict status must be checked before any merge. ### Additional context The five contributions tracked for this CI update are [#7063](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7063), [#7065](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7065), [#7349](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7349), [#7356](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7356) and [#7357](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7357). The reopened [#7062](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7062) is also still open. Verified at 10/27/2026 08:35:11: all five latest heads have successful required code CI and independent packet-capture checks. Title and initial author-readiness checks also pass, and GitHub reports no merge conflicts for these five. They remain open for maintainer review. | PR | Latest head | Required code CI | Independent packet capture | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | [#7063](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7063) | `f5f6f88a` | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40470912938) | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40470912918) | | [#7065](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7065) | `da988cdc` | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40471023038) | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40471022993) | | [#7349](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7349) | `57136e6f` | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40469048903) | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40469048779) | | [#7356](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7356) | `bd19f1e0` | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40471140323) | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40471140064) | | [#7357](https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/7357) | `ffe27cd3` | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40471250775) | [success](https://github.com/morluto/rea/actions/runs/40471250744) | The three initial human-owner declarations are filled for each of these five. These checks and declarations do not establish maintainer approval or permission to merge. Latest status update (2026-10-27T11:41:00.7785151Z): all six open PRs now have updated heads and GitHub reports no merge conflicts. The upstream #7479 test-fixture change required the same small alignment on five branches; #7062 also received targeted fixture corrections and a model identity regression update. Their new required CI runs are queued or running. The green results in the timestamped table above belong to the earlier heads, and are not evidence that these latest heads have passed. Current heads: #7062 `5cf98e2c`, #7063 `338cf3cc`, #7065 `caa0734e`, #7349 `5733ebdd`, #7356 `2ac251b3`, #7357 `5e004ed5`. I have additional fixes to contribute and would appreciate documented guidance that reduces repeated synchronization. This question focuses on overlap handling; the review-time and queue questions already raised in #7243 do not need repeating here. Repeated upstream changes while these contributions await review mean repeatedly resolving overlaps, updating the same branches and running validation again. This consumes substantial maintenance time for both contributors and reviewers. I would appreciate timely review and a clear decision on what should be merged, changed, narrowed or closed, so that effort can go into further useful contributions.

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-31 00:50:01 +00:00

Author

Owner

@ShuaixinHuang commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2026):

I'm pretty angry about this, honestly. Re-integrating upstream every single time is eating up huge chunks of my time and killing my enthusiasm for the project. CI passes, but upstream shifts again every time a review happens, and I still haven't seen a single reviewer respond. I don't know how much more of this I can keep up — if we can't get it settled now, I think I'm close to walking away from PRs on this project.

@ShuaixinHuang commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2026): I'm pretty angry about this, honestly. Re-integrating upstream every single time is eating up huge chunks of my time and killing my enthusiasm for the project. CI passes, but upstream shifts again every time a review happens, and I still haven't seen a single reviewer respond. I don't know how much more of this I can keep up — if we can't get it settled now, I think I'm close to walking away from PRs on this project.

bsakaguchi referenced this issue

2026-10-31 01:13:03 +00:00

[PR #4459] [MERGED] fix(rizin): retain interrupted command frames #6254

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference

morluto/rea#4459

No description provided.

Rows
Columns