Re: [PATCH 0/5] fc/transport-helper-sync-error-fix rebased

> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> As I have said in the recent What's cooking reports, the original
> >> posted here were based on older codebase and needed to be rebased,
> >> but it had some conflicts and I wanted to see the result double
> >> checked by the original author before we can merge it to 'next',
> >> cooked there and hopefully merged to 'master' before tagging -rc1.
> >> 
> >> So here is the series that has been queued in 'pu' for the past
> >> several days.
> >> 
> >> Felipe, can you double check it?
> >
> > These patches don't help much,...
> 
> What do you mean by that, exactly?  As long as your "don't help
> much" is "would not hurt and will help some even for a small subset
> of audience", that would be OK, but I am puzzled.

> My reading of your responses to bug reports and the cover letter of
> the series has been that these were real fixes to a real problem
> without downsides, and that you consider that they are good changes
> to have in the upcoming release.
> 
> I am hoping that you did not mean that we shouldn't merge it to the
> 'next' and 'master' branches, but if that is what you meant, can we
> hear what the downsides of the series are?
> Are they more churn than they are worth without solving the real
> issue?  Do they regress for some repositories/workflows while
> improving for others?  I didn't get such an impression.

> > ..., I did and interdiff with my own fixes and this is the result:
> > ...  I don't like it, but it's OK.
> 
> Correct.  Following the coding style of the project is not the
> matter for your liking or not liking.  It is part of being on the
> same codebase with other participant of this project.