On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Mike Meyer <m...@mired.org> wrote: >>> So, for the third time, can you describe your proposed new feature >>*without* saying the words "git" or "rebase". >>No: it's too much work, and many people understand "git rebase", and > > -1.
So is that a -1 to the attitude, the proposal, or both? I can't tell. If the attitude, can you explain why you would want an explanation of "rebase" in words other than those that have already been used (probably by so many)? What's the problem with making reference to git? Is git anathema? Is this NIH syndrome? _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
