Thread (8 messages) flat view 8 messages, 2 authors, 2021-06-15

Re: [PATCH] xdiff: implement a zealous diff3

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2021-06-15 09:24:44

On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 11:19:46PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
quoted
My point is that if you are going to repost a patch that has known
problems,
It was not known that it had problems.

That fact that person X said patch Y had a problem doesn't necessarily
mean that patch Y has a problem.

  1. The problem in the past might not apply in the present
  2. The problem X person had might be specific to his/her setup
  3. The problem might be due a combination of patches, not the patch
     itself

Plus many others.

A logical person sees evidence for what it is, and the only thing that
person X saying patch Y had a problem means, is that person X said patch
Y had a problem.
Wow.

For one thing, you could still relay the _report_ of a problem along
with the patch, which would be valuable information for reviewers.

But much more important, in my opinion: that you would dismiss without
further investigation a report of a bug from the one person who actually
had experience running with the patch implies a level of carelessness
that I'm not comfortable with for the project.

I had already given up on having substantive discussion with you, but I
had hoped I could help the project by pointing out relevant facts in
areas that you were working in. But if a simple statement like "this
segfaulted for me" is not even useful, then I don't see much point in
communicating with you at all.

-Peff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help