Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> writes: > Where is the evidence? You say remote-hg doesn't work, I say it does, > the difference is that I have evidence to prove it.
There are many projects that don't do what they claim. I gave remote-hg a few minutes and moved on since (at the time) it didn't seem interesting enough to be worth the effort of making proper bug reports. There's a lot of low-quality code in the world and I'm willing to tolerate a certain false-positive rate. I apologize for misdiagnosing your project and I'm happy to believe that you have since fixed the bugs. I was merely answering you question of why some of us contributed to gitifyhg in preference to remote-hg. I see no value in dwelling on the value judgement I made a few months ago. Additionally, I have almost no use for either project any more. > remote-hg doesn't fail with the non-fast-forward error, in fact, it > doesn't fail at all, it pushes correctly, and that's reported as a > failure. I don't agree that force-pushing by default is "correct" behavior. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
