Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > Thanks for this response and especially the links. My initial gut > response was similar to Dscho's. Which is not surprising, because it > apparently was also my initial response to chainlint.sed back then. ;) > > But I do think that chainlint.sed has proven itself to be both useful > and not much of a maintenance burden. My only real complaint was the > additional runtime in a few corner cases, and that is exactly what > you're addressing here. I have nothing to add to the above ;-) Thanks all (including Dscho who made us be more explicit in pros-and-cons).
