Re: [RFC/PATCH] git put: an alternative to add/reset/checkout
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jan 23, 2012, 18:10 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vaa5e9tn2.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <CADo4Y9j5MwKr+rWza0ncLWuthY6x+s68CQYbY2+c8-E5pAa=Sw@mail.gmail.com>
Michael Nahas <mike.nahas@gmail.com> writes:
> It obviously isn't the design-first-then-find-a-willing-programmer of > the project I ran. I don't know if it's the IETF's "running code and > a general consensus".
These two are not necessarily incompatible.
A proposed new feature needs to be explained well, describing in what situation it will help what kind of users and without hurting others and why it is a worthy addition.
We require a general consensus that any proposed change is a worthy addition, and a working code is often a good addition to help us reaching one, because people can guess what is being proposed even when the idea is presented poorly. A poorly presented idea without working code often fares no better than just a handwaving with crazy talk, as you fail to make others realize what you are trying to achieve.
But working code is not a requirement to present good ideas. It just helps to add clarity to it.