git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH v5 00/36] Massive improvents to rebase and cherry-pick

From
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date
Jun 11, 2013, 03:52 UTC
Message-ID
<CAMP44s0+Qz5urzUtv-ZQr-4r-jzYMcnXD4=8f51sQbXdEyQvKg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<CABURp0qG6AqR-y1YLB0FdX-=kniHoZBfwUs0d7gPnfDfh9Pajw@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Phil Hord <phil.hord@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 34 quoted lines
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Phil Hord <phil.hord@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Felipe Contreras
>>> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Felipe Contreras
>>>> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > Same as before, but:
>>>>
>>>> Also, remove the patches from Martin von Zweigbergk, because
>>>> apparently some people have trouble understanding that they were not
>>>> part of this series.
>>>
>>> Please try not to sound disgruntled. This attitude is toxic. You have
>>> turned this change into a complaint: that "some people have trouble
>>> understanding" which shows a genuine lack of understanding and
>>> compassion on your part.  Instead you can phrase your change notes
>>> more helpfully if you make changes only when you yourself actually
>>> believe the change should be made.  If you cannot do this, perhaps you
>>> can pretend.
>>
>> That would be dishonest. Moreover, there wasn't a good reason to
>> remove these patches, I made it clear I added those patches only to
>> make sure the real patches of this series worked correctly. Also, I
>> clarified that to Thomas Rast[1], only to receive a totally
>> unconstructive comment[2].
>>
>> Why don't you ask Thomas Rast to be more constructive[2]?
>>
>> Then Johan Herland uses that as an example of a constructive
>> comment[3]. Why don't you correct Johan Herland?
>
> I do not see what their comments have to do with your attitude.

My attitude is fine. I sent a lot of patches, and I made clear that some of them were meant only to test the rest. And I clarified that twice.

There's nothing wrong with that.
> Aren't your own man with cogent self-will and personal responsibility?
>  Why should I also have to consider these other emails which I have
> not bothered to read yet?

Don't be that girlfriend that brings the times you haven't picked up the towel properly when talking about something completely and totally different.

When talking about the attitude in *this* patch series, limit yourself to *this* patch series.

Show 5 quoted lines
>> No, you pick the easy target: me.
>
> You seem to have mistaken me for someone else.  Moreover, you seem to
> have mistaken you for someone else.  You are the least easy target I
> know of on this list.
> Everyone else seems open to community standards.

And yet you try to correct me, who did nothing wrong. And ignore the transgressions of the other people, whom I already demonstrated actually *did* do something wrong. How convenient of you to not mention my arguments *at all*.

Show 14 quoted lines
>> I already dd more than my fair share by carrying these 36 patches
>> through several iterations, yet you ask *more* of me. Why don't you
>> ask more of the people that just hit reply on their MUA?
>>
>> Thomas' task was easy; he simply had to say "Oh, these aren't meant to
>> be applied, got it."
>>
>> [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/227039
>> [2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/227040
>> [3] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/227102
>
> I did not comment on their posts because they did not catch my eye.
> Rebase and cherry-pick improvements are interesting to me, so I read
> your post.  I will try not to make this mistake again.
Yes, because my patches are so obviously wrong.

If you were a truly productive member of this community, you would ignore all the bullshit, take the patches, fix whatever is technically wrong with them (nothing), and resend them.

But no, that would be way too productive.
-- 
Felipe Contreras
Previous: Phil Hord
Message 42 of 42 in “Massive improvents to rebase and cherry-pick”
  1. 00/36 Massive improvents to rebase and cherry-pickFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  2. 01/36 build: generate and clean test scriptsFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  3. 02/36 build: do not install git-remote-testgitFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  4. 03/36 build: trivial cleanupFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  5. 04/36 build: add builtin libFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  6. 05/36 log-tree: remove dependency from sequencerFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  7. 06/36 Move sequencer to builtinFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  8. 07/36 unpack-trees: plug a memory leakFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  9. 08/36 read-cache: plug a few leaksFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  10. 09/36 sequencer: remove useless indentationFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  11. 10/36 sequencer: trivial fixFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  12. 11/36 cherry-pick: don't barf when there's nothing to doFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  13. 12/36 cherry-pick: add --skip-empty optionFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  14. 13/36 revert/cherry-pick: add --quiet optionFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  15. 14/36 revert/cherry-pick: add --skip optionFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  16. 15/36 builtin: add rewrite helperFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  17. 16/36 cherry-pick: store rewritten commitsFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  18. 17/36 cherry-pick: don't store skipped commitFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  19. 18/36 builtin: move run_rewrite_hook() to rewrite.cFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  20. 19/36 builtin: add copy_rewrite_notes()Felipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  21. 20/36 cherry-pick: copy notes and run hooksFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  22. 21/36 cherry-pick: add --action-name optionFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  23. 22/36 cherry-pick: remember rerere-autoupdateFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  24. 23/36 rebase: split the cherry-pick stuffFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  25. 24/36 rebase: cherry-pick: fix mode storageFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  26. 25/36 rebase: cherry-pick: fix sequence continuationFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  27. 26/36 rebase: cherry-pick: fix abort of cherry modeFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  28. 27/36 rebase: cherry-pick: fix command invocationsFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  29. 28/36 rebase: cherry-pick: fix status messagesFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  30. 29/36 rebase: cherry-pick: automatically commit stageFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  31. 30/36 rebase: cherry-pick: set correct action-nameFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  32. 31/36 rebase: trivial cleanupFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  33. 32/36 rebase: use 'cherrypick' mode instead of 'am'Felipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  34. 33/36 rebase: cherry-pick: fix for shell promptFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  35. 34/36 rebase: cherry-pick: add merge optionsFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  36. 35/36 rebase: remove merge modeFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  37. 36/36 rebase: cherry-pick: add copyrightFelipe Contreras, Jun 9, 2013
  38. Felipe ContrerasJun 9, 2013
  39. Phil HordJun 10, 2013
  40. Felipe ContrerasJun 10, 2013
  41. Phil HordJun 11, 2013
  42. Felipe ContrerasJun 11, 2013

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.