Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> But I do not care that much really. The patch is good either way, if
> you don't like it, you go ahead and fix it, because I won't. I have
> 174 remote-helper related patches in my queue, and nobody benefits
> from rambling about a one liner that is obviously correct, not you,
> not me, not the users, not the developers.
You don't stick to the rules of this project, which have been pointed
out already:
The body should provide a meaningful commit message, which:
. explains the problem the change tries to solve, iow, what is wrong
with the current code without the change.
. justifies the way the change solves the problem, iow, why the
result with the change is better.
. alternate solutions considered but discarded, if any.
Your project is moving too fast to put up with the established
procedures in this community.
In fact you are pretty much holding us hostage with a "take it or keep
it broken while causing more work" attitude:
> Junio of course might disagree and drop this patch, but then he would
> need to deal with the fallout of possible conflicts.
You did not respond well to reviews and criticism. Even the
constructive fine-let's-do-the-work-for-him kind that Peff offered.
And on top of that, remote helpers are written against an interface that
was designed to allow working with external programs.
So why is this in git.git?
Why should we take any more contrib additions from you?
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html