From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D5E41F66F for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:08:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732289AbgKDSI2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:08:28 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:58313 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732277AbgKDSIV (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:08:21 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE4FEF7176; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:08:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=sasl; bh=lnGcwwkGUvMjCfgflSNmXOlDCKk=; b=Rwg3YXjldB3gvc3Dmljv oT1iGUa/VmUK5sKWitXaWmSzOKVzTASlNDMZEg/itFBVdRbnSE5BOk0QQ4egfeYR v/n7iGpXYumu6e/HbYawrc4D5Eoq8GBWrQzAr875cwVuzRaeikB/FAHAiOnz1Whh LSB8cXW4HHFvFxYZx4NvfE8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=rPcu2CI21EjThJCk9xHFGLgiRvqGHGM1KcZDFZjsc7r8ZN M5ROsFdv0CFMjOveyNgjMSYJTj8MG2dwuEcEKVmwYoVxDrjUv7PC4tLeWYfpo+bi H07Xi5B7FWcr1Y987TrVOmZ6PGZ93lQV7CGPZWbR+aguKPvnFl+i9SaNqgNEE= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C78E1F7174; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:08:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B5CBF7173; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:08:17 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Stefan Haller , Git , SZEDER =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= , =?utf-8?B?Tmd1?= =?utf-8?B?eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] completion: a bunch of updates References: <20190621223107.8022-1-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <0ec43318-bf83-25c4-a817-a150e2e47546@haller-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 10:08:15 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B6A1C4C8-1EC8-11EB-827A-D609E328BF65-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Felipe Contreras writes: > To state the opinion of a person is not a derogatory statement. This > is literally what they said: > >> > > Now, how about you make a compromise between "correctness" and >> > > usability? >> > >> > No. > > I'm not doing anything but repeating their stated opinion. It is a > fact. If you don't like their stated opinion, feel free to talk to > them. I had to read the exchange three times to be reasonably confident that the party that was asking the question was you and Zsh folks was who said "No.", as there were so little in the context to go by, in order to tell what was being discussed (I initially even thought they asked the question and you gave a short "no", before realizing it probably is the other way around). In the short quote given without enough context, I cannot see anything more than a disagreement of the degree of "correctness" and "usability" expected by the two parties in the discussion. Even if I knew what exact "incorrectness" and "usability" were on topic back when you two argued, I know people strike balance at different place. Even though I may agree with your argument in that particular case, I can understand (if not accept) if Zsh folks thought differently. And it does not matter if I agree with you that they are better off taking a small "incorrectness" to gain "usability"---the Zsh show is run over there by Zsh folks, and I am not a participant. But the take-away I got from your short quote was that I see no evidence that Zsh folks do not care about usability.