From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Max Horn Subject: Re: My patches Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:21:07 +0200 Message-ID: <9A62D872-0FCF-41B9-B185-7061B25F1CBC@quendi.de> References: <20131012072450.GA21165@nysa> <525c64ebe2390_197a905e84c@nysa.notmuch> <52605a36eef0f_448145fe7466@nysa.notmuch> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FB9DF2B3-CCC5-4D2A-B4E5-CD70363441EA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Felipe Contreras X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Oct 18 13:40:17 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VX8Pf-0006v9-C0 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:40:15 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752956Ab3JRLkI (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Oct 2013 07:40:08 -0400 Received: from wp256.webpack.hosteurope.de ([80.237.133.25]:55659 "EHLO wp256.webpack.hosteurope.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751961Ab3JRLkH (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Oct 2013 07:40:07 -0400 Received: from fb07-alg-gast1.math.uni-giessen.de ([134.176.24.161]); authenticated by wp256.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) id 1VX87C-0000WV-Cm; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:21:10 +0200 In-Reply-To: <52605a36eef0f_448145fe7466@nysa.notmuch> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;max@quendi.de;1382096407;8ba1ca4c; Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: --Apple-Mail=_FB9DF2B3-CCC5-4D2A-B4E5-CD70363441EA Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I guess most other people keep out of this because they are sensible = enough to not feed the troll, and instead focus on useful things. But I = can't help it, I have to say this. On 17.10.2013, at 23:44, Felipe Contreras = wrote: > Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Felipe Contreras writes: >>=20 >>> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>>> Such a review comment and the discussion that follows it after a >>>> patch is posted is an essential part of the collaborative >>>> development process in this community and it has helped the quality >>>> of our end product. We unfortunately saw time and again that the >>>> process rarely works when the discussion involves your patches. >>>=20 >>> No, you did not. What you saw was a person that unlike a trained = dog, argued >>> against you. And apparently your definition of a good discussion is = one in >>> which the other person just does what you say, and doesn't argue = back. >>=20 >> That is so untrue that it is not even funny. >=20 > It is true, and there's penty of evidence that proves it. No, it is not true, and there is plenty of evidence that proves it. But I don't think it's helpful for either of us drag up such "evidence", = as it'll convince nobody -- indeed, I am sure almost everybody here has = already formed a clear opinion on this matter. And I hazard to guess = that the vast majority agree with Junio on this (based, again, on email = evidence). Not with you. Of course one can't prove mathematical theorems by a majority vote, but = as we are not talking about theorems, but rather about judging whether = Junion's behavior is considered fair or not, I think it is appropriate = to. Moreover, if I look at e.g. the "staging area" discussion, you also = bring up the "everybody but Junio and one other guy" argument = (incorrectly generalizing from "those people on this mailing list who = chose to reply" to "everybody"), so I think I am entitled to do the same = ;-). (BTW, I am actually in favor of using the term "staging area" over = "index") > Every single time that you get mad at me, it's because I disagree with = you. I have not yet seen Junio get "mad" here, even in discussions with you = were I think most other people would indeed have gotten "mad" at you. He = stays remarkably polite, despite the insults and dirt you keep flinging = at him... If at all, it would seem that you are getting mad at Junio. >=20 >> Contributors often make sensible counter-arguments and/or explain >> the rationale better than they did in their original messages, and >> then receive a "Thanks for a dose of sanity" (or an equivalent >> phrased in different ways). >=20 > Yes, when there's an agreement, so you are basically proving what I = said. I > disagree with you, you disagree with me, and that means I'm the = problem. Actually, it is more like this: "Felipe disagrees with Junio, Junio = disagrees with Felipe, Felipe insults Junio and in passing half a dozen = other people." It is the latter point which makes the situation = asymmetric, and indeed indicates you as the problem. > In any healthy collaborative project that simply means there was a > disagreement, and that's that. If your premise was correct (that there is simply a disagreement), then = this conclusion might be correct. As it is, though, your premise is = false. The problem is rather a disruptive person: you. Quite sad, since = you seem to have some good ideas and code contributions! I am in = particular grateful for your work on remote helpers, both on specific = ones (git-remote-hg) and also on improving the whole remote helper = interface. I hope some of this work can eventually be merged... But at the end of the day, we most (all?) of us here are volunteers, and = unlike what you seem to claim a lot, for most of us, making git better = is *not* the number 1 priority in our lives... In particular, if working = with you would make git better, but at the same time would give me = ulcers, well, my choice is clear to me... Perhaps it wouldn't be best = for git, but I don't think anybody (except, perhaps, you) would blame me = for it. Or, for that matter, Junio.=20 @Junio: Thank you for being an opinionated but also very fair project = lead, who listens to *constructive* feedback, and has again and again = demonstrated through action a readiness to revise a position based on = sensible discussions conducted on this list. Max --Apple-Mail=_FB9DF2B3-CCC5-4D2A-B4E5-CD70363441EA Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iF4EAREIAAYFAlJhGacACgkQIpJVslrhe1k2oQD/SK0wAddM7HxgEVCsVPMDgWEU 2DqnV7IauzUeWxiHH6kA/iNgN3P+galbaL2YXQDUMOTrhZWo9f8lGdjApqAXgupp =EP3P -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_FB9DF2B3-CCC5-4D2A-B4E5-CD70363441EA--