Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] tests(mingw): avoid very slow `mingw_test_cmp`

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Nov 18, 2022, 18:14 UTC
Message-ID: <Y3fLdJ7CIIU8fj0g@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <qp0556o2-6q18-8556-0n8s-p28831qr6qs6@tzk.qr>

On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 02:32:28PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> > But I'm not sure the rewritten version does what you claim, at least in
> > my own personal opinion.
> >
> > It is not helpful to say the original approach "saw a lot of backlash".
>
> It is the nicest thing I can say about it.

I don't think you have to or should refer to the earlier round of review at all.

Show 9 quoted lines

> > It is helpful, on the other hand, to say what about the original
> > approach gave reviewers pause, and why that alternative approach isn't
> > pursued here.
> >
> > Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but I really do stand by my original
> > suggestion from back in [1].
>
> We can also keep hitting a dead horse, but I don't think that will make
> anything any better.

Instead, it would be much more helpful to explain what you tried before, and why you are taking a different approach now.

I am simply not comfortable with taking the patch with the way the body is currently written.

Thanks, Taylor