Junio C Hamano wrote: > Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > This is going to sound harsh, but people shouldn't waste (any more) > > time reviewing the patches in this thread or the "merge: cleanups and > > fix" series submitted elsewhere. They should all just be rejected. > > > > I do not think it is reasonable to expect reviewers to spend time > > responding to re-posted patches when: > > * no attempt was made to make sure they were up-to-date with current > > code beyond compiling (see below) > > * no attempt was made to address missing items pointed out in > > response to the original submission[1] > > * no attempt was made to handle or even test particular cases > > pointed out in response to the original submission (see [1] and below) > > * the patches were posted despite knowing they caused segfaults, and > > without even stating as much![2] > > * the segfault "fixes" are submitted as a separate series from the > > patch introducing the segfault[3], raising the risk that one gets > > picked up without the other. > > Fair enough. Thanks. I didn't know some people's opinions on this mailing list were automatically promoted to facts, but FWIW the vast majority of the points stated above are simply not true. -- Felipe Contreras
