Re: [PATCH 1/3] cherry-pick: add support to copy notes
- From
Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 29, 2013, 13:48 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CALkWK0kK+Mbscsue0wwU5QDKXCrw5Q078MCdOVCoJnMZq7T6UA@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAMP44s2tvUs813hrheWpWXR2G4kMJL4rscEtynaKYvw5a6HCHA@mail.gmail.com>
Felipe Contreras wrote:
> What you are really complaining about is that I don't agree with > *every* single suggestion you make. And since you made them, they must > be sensible, and single I don't agree with you, I must not be > sensible, is that right?
Oh, I have no problems: I reviewed git-related, and it resulted in massive simplifications and improvements; those threads didn't run wild. I was mainly criticizing Thomas' review style (when it comes to reviewing your patches in particular), and was prodding him to "make concrete suggestions" in a one-email review, and leave it at that. What started out as a pointer to the guidelines:
Thomas Rast wrote:
> We've been over this already: > > The body should provide a meaningful commit message, which:
has resulted in this thread running wild.
> There's nothing wrong with me choosing how best to spend my time. Really.
Ofcourse you are. You have arguably spent it very productively solving a lot of user issues (especially remote-bzr).
Personally, I try to do the minimum amount of boring work required to make sure that a good series gets in. Sometimes this is a little high (for a recent example, see my pickaxe-doc series). The result being that I just won't work on documentation in the future because doing iterations is so piss boring: the git community needs to recognize this problem and make amends.