Re: [PATCH 1/9] remote-bzr: trivial cleanups

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

Felipe Contreras [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Thomas Rast [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Felipe Contreras [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

But I do not care that much really. The patch is good either way, if
you don't like it, you go ahead and fix it, because I won't. I have
174 remote-helper related patches in my queue, and nobody benefits
from rambling about a one liner that is obviously correct, not you,
not me, not the users, not the developers.

You don't stick to the rules of this project, which have been pointed
out already:

The rules of the contrib area are different from the ones of the rest
of the project.

Yes and no.

A contrib/ material may not be held to the same high standard, but
that does not mean a contrib/ area maintainer has a blank check to
do anything there.

Nor did I claim I had one.

It would be pretty obvious to people observing what happens in the
area after a while, if the quality standard the area maintainer
enforces is too out of whack, and at that point the area maintainer
deserves to be ridiculed ;-)

Of course, but the claim the rules are different still stands.

quoted

And I don't recall Peff ever doing this "constructive
fine-let's-do-the-work-for-him" on any contrib/remote-helpers stuff.

I do not think Thomas was talking specific about contrib/ material
but your interaction in general with other developers.

Cf. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/220427/focus=220891

Yeah but how is that relevant in this context? We are talking about a
particular patch of remote-bzr. And he immediately used that claim as
ammunition to suggest the whole remote-helpers should be dropped. It
does not follow.

Any suggestion to drop remote-helpers should use facts and arguments
regarding remote-helpers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras