On 30 December 2012 13:02, Nico Williams <n...@cryptonector.com> wrote:
> 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? > I can't speak for Mike Meyer, but I'd -1 that attitude because you're basically saying, stripping away the pretty posturing, "I WANT THIS NEW FEATURE AND I WON'T EXPLAIN IT TO YOU BECAUSE THAT'S TOO MUCH WORK FOR ME INSTEAD I WANT YOU TO DO THE WORK FOR ME!" If you can't (or, rather, won't!) explain Git's rebase command to people who *very obviously are not using Git* and who are equally obviously *not interested in learning or using Git*, then your attitude does, in fact, reek. You want the feature. We don't. It's kind of up to *you* to explain to *us * (in *our* terms!) why it's important and how it doesn't undermine the very point of Fossil's design. -- "Perhaps people don't believe this, but throughout all of the discussions of entering China our focus has really been what's best for the Chinese people. It's not been about our revenue or profit or whatnot." --Sergey Brin, demonstrating the emptiness of the "don't be evil" mantra.
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
