From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 918E2208B4 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 21:33:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752536AbdHJVdv (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2017 17:33:51 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:35356 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751455AbdHJVdv (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2017 17:33:51 -0400 Received: (qmail 29832 invoked by uid 109); 10 Aug 2017 21:33:51 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 21:33:51 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 10374 invoked by uid 111); 10 Aug 2017 21:34:14 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 17:34:14 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 10 Aug 2017 17:33:49 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 17:33:49 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] dropping support for older curl Message-ID: <20170810213348.g4lue3j4uz6qapal@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20170809120024.7phdjzjv54uv5dpz@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170809214758.p77fqrwxanb4zn5a@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:36:41AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hopefully I had better luck expressing my concerns this time? I understand your argument much better now. I'm still not sure I agree. -Peff