From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Ryan Hendrickson <ryan.hendrickson@alum.mit.edu>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] http: do not ignore proxy path
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2024 14:13:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqfrrmbpbv.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <30733887-33d8-4049-7dc9-8bc9d0b106da@alum.mit.edu> (Ryan Hendrickson's message of "Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:39:48 -0400 (EDT)")
Ryan Hendrickson <ryan.hendrickson@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> At 2024-08-02 12:28-0700, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> sent:
>
>>>>> Is this blocking feedback? This strikes me as speculative
>>>>> over-engineering
>>>>
>>>> No, it is loosening a pattern that is overly tight and as a side
>>>> effect shortening the line to more readable length ;-).
>>>
>>> Blocking or not?
>>
>> If we are updating anyway, that question is irrelevant, no? This
>> version may hit 'seen' but until the next version comes it will not
>> advance to 'next'.
>
> I can't figure out what you mean by this so I am going to proceed as
> if you had simply said ‘non-blocking’.
It does not make much sense to ask if a suggestion is "blocking" or
"non-blocking". If you respond with a reasonable explanation why
you do not want to take a suggestion, I may (or may not) say that
your reasoning makes sense. IOW, making me say "it is blocking"
means you want to me to say that I won't listen to you no matter
what you say. That is rarely be the case.
In this case, I do not think it makes sense to insist with -Fx that
the error message has the exact message. And I do not think your
"strikes me as" qualifies as a "reasonable explanation".
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-02 21:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-26 15:52 [PATCH] http: do not ignore proxy path Ryan Hendrickson via GitGitGadget
2024-07-26 16:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-07-26 17:12 ` Ryan Hendrickson
2024-07-26 17:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-07-26 21:11 ` Jeff King
2024-07-26 22:43 ` Ryan Hendrickson
2024-07-29 19:31 ` Jeff King
2024-07-27 6:44 ` [PATCH v2] " Ryan Hendrickson via GitGitGadget
2024-07-29 20:09 ` Jeff King
2024-07-31 15:33 ` Ryan Hendrickson
2024-07-31 16:01 ` [PATCH v3] " Ryan Hendrickson via GitGitGadget
2024-07-31 22:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-08-01 3:44 ` Ryan Hendrickson
2024-08-01 5:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-08-01 5:45 ` Jeff King
2024-08-01 14:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-08-01 5:22 ` [PATCH v4] " Ryan Hendrickson via GitGitGadget
2024-08-01 6:04 ` Jeff King
2024-08-01 17:04 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-08-02 5:20 ` [PATCH v5] " Ryan Hendrickson via GitGitGadget
2024-08-02 15:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-08-02 16:43 ` Ryan Hendrickson
2024-08-02 17:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-08-02 18:03 ` Ryan Hendrickson
2024-08-02 19:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-08-02 19:39 ` Ryan Hendrickson
2024-08-02 21:13 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2024-08-02 21:26 ` Ryan Hendrickson
2024-08-02 21:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-08-02 21:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-08-02 22:14 ` Ryan Hendrickson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqfrrmbpbv.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=ryan.hendrickson@alum.mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).