Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:19 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> wrote: >> In my head, it wasn't a reversion -- it was a revision. I honestly thought >> that you'd be okay with the change, having taken this statement: > > I think if you place yourself in my shoes, I think perhaps you'd > understand why I view it as a "reversion". I made the change, you > said, "please revert", we start to discuss, and in the middle of the > discussion, you just revert the change anyway. > > At the least, I think it would have been appropriate for you to > suggest the change and then I could have said "Sure, that's fine - go > ahead and commit." It wasn't like I wasn't trying to engage in a > dialogue to see what would be better. Instead, I feel that you just > did what you wanted to do and didn't really listen to me at all. > > Maybe I'm dead wrong, but that's certainly how I feel at the moment. -- > justin
Life is like a version control system with no obliterate feature. Change comes only via the addition of new revisions. So what can I do to make you less unhappy in HEAD? -- C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
