Re: [PATCH] run-command: simplify wait_or_whine

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:30 PM, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Felipe Contreras
>>> <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Yeah, and last year we returned a different code. The world didn't
>> end, because nobody is checking for the specific code. But if you want
>> to retain complexity forever, suit yourselves.
>
> And that was changed for a reason, compared to this change "because I
> like it". I maintain my NAK (not that it matters) until you justify
> your change better than "nobody is using it".

Who said the reason was "because I like it"? You don't agree that
making the code simpler and more maintainable is a good reason for any
change?

Anyway, if you care so much about the current behavior, why isn't
there any tests that check for this?

My patch passes *all* the tests.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]