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

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 20, 2014, 21:10 UTC
Message-ID: <7voazvlna8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <535413cbc7eaa_1f08dd12eca5@nysa.notmuch>

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

Show 13 quoted lines

> 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.