Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2012, #01; Sun, 3)

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 11, 2012, 10:27 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s1ESu0WKYmR6g51q3cwJ-BWC22SuTHucGVSEsGuGTrxDQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FD4DBD7.5070204@lsrfire.ath.cx>

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 7:39 PM, René Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx> wrote:

Show 30 quoted lines

> Am 06.06.2012 20:17, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>> The last remaining sticking point is what to do with the duplicated
>>>>> shell
>>>>> function.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is the problem with leaving it as it is; having it as a duplicate
>>>> function. It's not a *huge* maintenance burden, and it's a big problem
>>>> if the functions diverge.
>
>
> In the last sentence you say that there would be a "big problem".
>
>
>>> It is not even funny to see these two conflicting claims made in a
>>> single sentence.  Given that you are aware that it will cause a huge
>>> problem to the end users if they diverge,
>>
>>
>> What would be that *huge* problem?
>
>
> Here you ask what's so bad about it.
>
> Perhaps you meant to write "it's NOT a big problem" in the first place?

Yeap, that's what I meant.

-- 
Felipe Contreras