From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] remote-hg: more improvements
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 00:30:47 +0200
Message-ID: <87a9akro14.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <1399169814-20201-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
	<xmqq8uqdbgqg.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
	<536a83097302f_76ff7a52ec6c@nysa.notmuch>
	<xmqqvbth8ha9.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
	<536a999e2c0c_76ff7a52ec1e@nysa.notmuch>
	<xmqqoaz95ees.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
	<536ad9601b73b_3caaa612ecdc@nysa.notmuch>
	<CAGK7Mr4DYuU34Zf_3fRQFkT+1TGOkpfLPUnQh=tYh6EMtBEt9A@mail.gmail.com>
	<xmqq8uq6rd30.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
	<CAGK7Mr7AcqKnEBk1NwzJFJVSSQE9uWTE00zi+B9z6i0V5tBrEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<87mweku2pt.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<xmqq61l8hubw.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: Philippe Vaucher <philippe.vaucher@gmail.com>,
	"git\@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 15 00:30:55 2014
Return-path: <git-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org
Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67])
	by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <git-owner@vger.kernel.org>)
	id 1WkhhO-00014B-T8
	for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 15 May 2014 00:30:55 +0200
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753593AbaENWau (ORCPT <rfc822;gcvg-git-2@m.gmane.org>);
	Wed, 14 May 2014 18:30:50 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:57411 "EHLO
	fencepost.gnu.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753155AbaENWas (ORCPT <rfc822;git@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 14 May 2014 18:30:48 -0400
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56451 helo=lola)
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dak@gnu.org>)
	id 1WkhhH-0007uB-N0; Wed, 14 May 2014 18:30:48 -0400
Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 3673BE0BD9; Thu, 15 May 2014 00:30:47 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <xmqq61l8hubw.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (Junio C. Hamano's
	message of "Wed, 14 May 2014 15:24:51 -0700")
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux)
Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <git.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/249042>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Philippe Vaucher <philippe.vaucher@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Thanks for the explanation. I think it underlines well the A)
>>> technical issues (quality commits) and the B) social issues (ability
>>> to communicate in a friendly way & respond constructively), which we
>>> discovered are both *essential* for contributing to git.
>>
>> I'm not entirely convinced of that: there is something akin to drop-dead
>> gorgeous code: code that is so well done that it would not matter with
>> regard to its maintenance whether or not its author dropped dead because
>> it's both done well as well as documented in a manner where the original
>> author could not offer significant additional help.
>
> I would have to say that you are living in a fantasy land.  During
> the entire life of Git, I do not think I ever saw such a code that
> is perfect from the get-go and did not require any maintenance to
> adjust to the changing time.

You are attacking a straw man.  "where the original author could not
offer significant _additional_ help" does not at all equate "does not
require any maintenance".

-- 
David Kastrup