Re: git bikeshedding (Re: triggers in dpkg, and dpkg maintenance)
Clint Adams writes ("Re: git bikeshedding (Re: triggers in dpkg, and dpkg maintenance)"):
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:55:00AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Isn't this going way out of proportion? That's the first I hear from any
> > *refuses* to merge, as opposed to "the merge not going to be done the way I
> > would like it to happen", and "it is taking too long for it to get merged".
> What's the difference, really? Isn't it a case of people on all sides
> trying to control each other instead of cooperating?
What would you like me to do ?
What Raphael is suggesting would result in extra real work for me: Not
only do I have to rework my branch so that my revision logs are pretty
the way he likes. I would also have to do additional substantial
merge conflict resolution on my flex branch. This is the most
error-prone part of coding. It would be completely unnecessary if he
just says `yes'.
I'm not trying to control Raphael at all. I just want his permission
to go ahead and deploy this important work.