Junio C Hamano wrote: > Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> It is easy enough to do, > > > > Yes. > > > >> gives a more descriptive name to the variable, > > > > I disagree. > > > >> and there is no reason to make the code deliberately worse by ignoring > >> improvement offered on the list. > > > > I doubt any person contributing to the mailing is making the code > > deliberately worse. > > Oh, I doubt that you do so with what you send out. I am saying that > you do so by not taking improvements. I do take improvements, when I agree they are improvements. In fact I did take virtually all of Elijah Newren's improvements. > It wastes reviewers' time, raises noise ratio in the list traffic, and > demotivates readers. Are you saying I must always agree with you, or I waste your time? In my view no one is infallible, just because X person says Y is an improvement that doesn't necessarily mean it actually is. I thought this was a collaborative process where you are supposed to listen to my feedback to your suggestions too. But I guess I shall take your "suggestions" as *orders*. -- Felipe Contreras
