Re: [PATCH 2/2] Move sequencer to builtin

From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 9, 2013, 20:34 UTC
Message-ID: <CALkWK0kMdQEXMTAwFLdz=FXEFiJfemM-+80SCALqS8q9yyr2Qw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20130609195706.GA2919@elie.Belkin>

Jonathan Nieder wrote:

> Of course the git development community is not organized enough for an
> intervention, but as context I thought I'd mention that that's what
> works.

Atleast this is more interesting that the canned Felipe-demeanour-complaint people constantly bring up boring everyone to death.

Show 10 quoted lines

> In that case, I can see a simple solution.  Felipe, who provides the
> most patches in git.git, by far (I don't know what that means, but
> I'll take it as an assumption), can put up a fork of git that you run.
> He can solicit whatever level of review he is comfortable with before
> pushing out changes, and then the result is available, without the
> pesky middle-man of those theorizers that were trying to develop git a
> different way and then got annoyed.
>
> No harm done, right?  It doesn't have to involve the list, because
> what's relevant in this worldview is code, not the people.

I'm still scratching my head over what you interpreted. People are not unimportant! Code is result of everyone in the community scratching their itches. I value each and every community member, and git.git wouldn't be what it is today without everyone. How did you interpret that as "I am only interested in Felipe's work, and everyone else is a theorizing buffoon"? I specifically said theorizing about Felipe's behavior over and over and over again is not changing anything. Stay on topic, and discuss how to improve libgit.a.

To me, it is important that everyone stays productive, so we can maximize output. I want more review, more discussions, more code. I get bored out of my mind when Junio does feature freezes and nothing goes in. Obviously, people getting offended and writing long emotional rants on the list is unproductive and undesirable.

> So why aren't I privately ignoring his messages and letting the list
> become what it may?  It would seem that I'm making the problem much
> worse, by starting discussions that focus of how to stop pushing other
> contributors away instead of (what's important) code!

It is imperative that you express your opinion and discuss it, if something is troubling you. What is this dichotomy between contributors and code? When did I discuss pushing contributors away?