Re: [PATCH 2/2] Move sequencer to builtin

Felipe Contreras [off-list ref] writes:

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:26 AM, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 09:17:56PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:

quoted

quoted

Definitely, yes.  Even if you look at the impact on code alone and
don't care about the people, destroying a collegial work environment
is harmful enough to the code to outweigh the (admittedly often
useful) patches.

A collegial work environment is overrated, and proof of that the Linux
kernel, where honest and straight talk is the bread and butter of the
mailing list. And the Linux kernel is the most successful software
project in history by far. It's code that speaks.

Sorry, but I don't agree, and I want to publicly state my opinion so
that Jonathan (and other bystanders on the list) knows that he is not
alone in his opinions.

FWIW, I'll add my voice here.

In addition to what has been said by Jeff and Jonathan already (and with
which I agree), I would like to point out one observation about your
style of discussion that I find particularly unproductive.

You have a tendency, when facing arguments by someone who does not agree
with you, of picking out one (usually minor) point of their statement
and attacking just *that* on grounds that are usually much harder to
argue, without regard for the bigger issue.  In effect you are
attempting to shift a significant burden of proof back to the other
party.

Case in point:

quoted

I have consistently found your demeanor on the list to be very
unfriendly and difficult to work with. It is one thing to have honest
and straight talk, and another thing to be obstinate, unmindful of
feedback (both with respect to technical details, as well as to
communication styles), and disrespectful of other people.

Go back to my 261 commits, show me one that is "unmindful of technical details".

-- 
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Thomas Rast [off-list ref] wrote:

You have a tendency, when facing arguments by someone who does not agree
with you, of picking out one (usually minor) point of their statement
and attacking just *that* on grounds that are usually much harder to
argue, without regard for the bigger issue.  In effect you are
attempting to shift a significant burden of proof back to the other
party.

He who makes a claim has the burden of proof.

That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

-- 
Felipe Contreras