Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > The references to "gendered prounouns" etc. are gone, perhaps there's a > > good reason to re-include them, but the point of "isn't that issue > > solved by recommending an orthagonal approach?" is one of the many > > things Stolee hasn't been addressing in the threads related to this > > series. > > > > To me that whole approach is somewhere between a solution in search of a > > problem and a "let's fix it and move on". Not something we need > > explicitly carry in our CodingGuidelines forever. > > This I think is the crux of the differences between you two. I'd > love to hear Derrick's response and eventually see a middle ground > reached. A middle ground is not always the best solution. The solution between punching people you disagree with and tolerance is not punching them a little bit. Sometimes one side is just incorrect. Also, a principle of logic is the burden of proof. Ævar doesn't have to prove that there's something wrong with Derek's proposal, Derek has the burden of proof. Why do we need a writing style lesson for one particular issue (that has never really been an issue) in CodingGuidelines? I have not seen an answer to that question--let alone a satisfactory one. -- Felipe Contreras
