Re: [PATCH v3] object-name: explain why <rev>~N fails in a shallow clone

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Harald Nordgren <haraldnordgren@gmail.com> writes:

>> We unfortunately haven't seen many folks interested in this change.
>> Is anybody interested in reviewing the patch to give it a push?
>>
>> Unless we see some volunteers to give it a review in a few weeks, I
>> will discard the topic out of my tree, as 'seen' has been crowded
>> with topics that have been collecting dust without getting many
>> reviews.
>
> Is it possible that maybe the review process needs to change if too
> many things are getting stuck? Rather than discarding acceptable work.

If it were acceptable, it would have long been in 'next' and
'master', though.  One of the important criteria for being
acceptable is whether others find it a reasonable change to make to
the system, and I do not know of a way to show that other than by
positive reviews.

And that is why I pinged the thread again.