From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Kastrup Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] remote-hg: more improvements Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 11:30:38 +0200 Message-ID: <87mweku2pt.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <1399169814-20201-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <536a83097302f_76ff7a52ec6c@nysa.notmuch> <536a999e2c0c_76ff7a52ec1e@nysa.notmuch> <536ad9601b73b_3caaa612ecdc@nysa.notmuch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Junio C Hamano , "git\@vger.kernel.org" To: Philippe Vaucher X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 14 11:31:01 2014 Return-path: 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 ) id 1WkVWa-0002CG-1J for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 14 May 2014 11:30:56 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753884AbaENJaw (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2014 05:30:52 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:40299 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752741AbaENJau (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2014 05:30:50 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39341 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WkVWT-0007l8-4t; Wed, 14 May 2014 05:30:49 -0400 Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E4C9FE0D4F; Wed, 14 May 2014 11:30:38 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Philippe Vaucher's message of "Wed, 14 May 2014 11:12:12 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Philippe Vaucher 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. Of course I am a major proponent of this view because of being myself somewhat differently endowed in the respective classes A and B, and so having at least some sort of exchange rate between the two can, however large the conversion fees, only benefit me... -- David Kastrup