Re: [PATCH 0/4] remote-hg: more improvements

[Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>]

Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > ...
> >> I was originally led to believe that its code quality was good
> >> enough, and that was why I merged the bottom three patches of the
> >> series even down to 'next' in the first place.  But after seeing the
> >> "Of course" response that led to [*1*], which made me recall many
> >> patch-review interactions with him, I have started to have doubts.
> >
> > This is bullshit, and a wrong direction fallacy.
> >
> > Event #1:
> > Junio rejects the graduation
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/248263
> >
> > Event #2:
> > I give up improving remote helpers in git.git
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/248063/focus=248341
> >
> > Junio is trying to make you believe that his decision (#1) was caused by
> > something I did (#2). Don't fall into that trap, #2 happened *AFTER* #1,
> > it can't possibly be the cause.
> 
> I think you misunderstood.
> 
> I never said that I do not want it to graduate up (out is an option)
> based on code quality.

Fair enough, that was my understanding up until today.

> But because I was asked, I thought about it, and then answered
> honestly.  I do not know what a trap you perceive is about, and I am
> not interested in your responses.

Philippe Vaucher didn't ask about quality, he asked about moving out of
contrib.

-- 
Felipe Contreras