Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Now, a meta point. Throughout this discussion, I have been hoping for >> some acknowledgement of the problem --- e.g. an "I am sympathetic to >> what you are trying to do, but <X>". I wasn't able to find that, and >> that is part of what contributed to the feeling of not being heard. [...] > And seeing the same "let's not enable the new extension" patch again > without much improved justification contributed greatly to the > feeling of not being heard. Thanks for the pointer. I had not understood before that you were unhappy with those commit messages. The commit message describes symptoms and the motivation for the change. I was confused at the original replies to patch 1 and 2 that seemed to be more about patch 3; patch 1 and 2 are meaningful without patch 3, so it would be odd to include a justification for patch 3 in their commit message. That said, it sounds like their commit messages are not adequate. I'd appreciate help from someone else to improve them. > The feeling is mutual. I was trying to diagnose what was going wrong with the conversation so as to move things forward on a better footing. It seems I only escalated things more. :( Sorry about that, and I hope there's some way to move forward. What is the best way to handle this? I am feeling somewhat burnt by this review process. If Ben and I, working together, are able to come up with a series that we both like, will you consider it for 2.20? Is there some other trusted contributor, such as Peff or Duy, that you would trust to represent your wishes so I can pursue their Reviewed-by without risking getting burnt in the same way again? Jonathan
