Re: [PATCH v2] diff: fix interaction between the "-s" option and other options

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: May 11, 2023, 01:50 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqpm77zlec.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <645c25dcb590b_7b63e294ea@chronos.notmuch>

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

Show 18 quoted lines

>> The "author" refers to the author of the "proposed log message" of
>> the patch in question, i.e. me in this case.  The author of the
>> patch under discussion thinks it is, so asking "Is it?",
>
> This is the full quote:
>
> ====
> Let's fix the interactions of these bits to first make "-s" work as intended.
> ====
>
> If instead you meant this:
>
> ====
> Let's fix the interactions of these bits to first make "-s" work as I intend.
> ====
>
> Then that's not a rationale, you are essentially saying "let's do X because I
> want".

This will be the last message from me on this. I wouldn't have even seen the message I am responding to, as I've already done my "once every few days sweep the spam folder to find things to salvage", but somebody notified me of it, so...

I didn't say and I didn't mean "as I intend", and you know that.

I, the author of the patch under discussion, know that it is the intention of the author of the earlier commit that introduced "--no-patch" to make it work identically as "-s".

I even had a quote from that earlier commit in the proposed log message of the patch (look for d09cd15d) to substantiate the fact that it was the intended way for the option "--no-patch" to work. So, either you are arguing against the patch you didn't even read, or you are playing your usual word twisting game just for the sake of arguing.

Show 7 quoted lines

>> And it led to unproductive and irritating waste of time number of times, and
>> eventually you were asked to leave the development community for at least a
>> few times.
>
> That is blatantly false. As a member of Git's Project Leadership Committee, you
> should know precisely how many times the committee has excercised this power,
> and it hasn't been "a few times", it has been one time.

You were asked to leave in May 2014, and according to that message from May 2014 [*1*], apparently you were asked to leave after a big "Felipe eruption" in the summer of 2013 [*2*]. These happened long before the project adopted a formal CoC at 5cdf2301 (add a Code of Conduct document, 2019-09-24).

But apparently the "fact" does not matter to you. I know that your next excuse will be "I said the committee never exercised this power more than once, which is a FACT", which may let you keep arguing further.

[References]

*1* https://lore.kernel.org/git/53709788.2050201@alum.mit.edu/ *2* https://public-inbox.org/git/7vsj0lvs8f.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org/