Hi Junio, On Tue, 25 Apr 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes: > > > In any case, it is a question unrelated to the work I performed in > > this patch series: the raison d'être of these patches is to allow > > timestamps to refer to dates that are currently insanely far in the > > future. > > Yes, but the job of the maintainer is to prevent narrow-focused > individual contributors from throwing us into a hole we cannot dig out > of by closing the door for plausible future enhancements. You make it sound as if I made the code stricter in any way, or even introduced a check that was not there before. As I did no such thing, you may want to reword your statement? Ciao, Dscho
