From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 16:43:14 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] t9350: point out that refs are not updated correctly
Message-ID: <CAMP44s0+=t_yVXkGEa=Zm_ugBOxaMnG+ApyriSGn3DqTV-5nEA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20121025071815.GA15790@elie.Belkin>

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>
>> Show me a single remote helper that manually stores SHA-1's and I
>> might believe you, but I doubt that, marks are too convenient.
>
> Oh dear lord.  Why are you arguing?  Explain how coming to a consensus
> on this will help accomplish something useful, and then I can explain
> my point of view.  In the meantime, this seems like a waste of time.

We don't need to come to a consensus because there is no problem.
Nobody has requested this feature, and nobody has faced any problem
with this. If you have no evidence of the contrary, that's what I'll
believe.

I agree it's a waste of time, so let's not talk about the :0 -> SHA-1
feature, or the master..master feature in this thread; they are
orthogonal.

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras