Clint Adams writes ("Re: git bikeshedding (Re: triggers in dpkg, and dpkg maintenance)"): > On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:55:00AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > Isn't this going way out of proportion? That's the first I hear from any > > *refuses* to merge, as opposed to "the merge not going to be done the way I > > would like it to happen", and "it is taking too long for it to get merged". > > What's the difference, really? Isn't it a case of people on all sides > trying to control each other instead of cooperating?
What would you like me to do ? What Raphael is suggesting would result in extra real work for me: Not only do I have to rework my branch so that my revision logs are pretty the way he likes. I would also have to do additional substantial merge conflict resolution on my flex branch. This is the most error-prone part of coding. It would be completely unnecessary if he just says `yes'. I'm not trying to control Raphael at all. I just want his permission to go ahead and deploy this important work. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]