| 1 |
Dnia 2014-02-24, o godz. 13:04:13 |
| 2 |
hasufell <hasufell@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 5 |
> Hash: SHA512 |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Michał Górny: |
| 8 |
> > Dnia 2014-02-24, o godz. 01:18:49 hasufell <hasufell@g.o> |
| 9 |
> > napisał(a): |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> >> But to make it more clear to you: I don't think that removing |
| 12 |
> >> shallow clone support is an improvement, so I vote against |
| 13 |
> >> removing it. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > Then please provide patches that add proper support for that. The |
| 16 |
> > changes were necessary to fix repeatedly reported bugs/requests |
| 17 |
> > while the shallow clone code conflicted with them. |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > I will be happy to re-introduce them when I have time and proper |
| 20 |
> > design. Complaining isn't going to help, you know. |
| 21 |
> > |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> I might, but before working on something it has to be discussed first. |
| 24 |
> I won't put effort into something without knowing if it's for nothing |
| 25 |
> (e.g. maintainer disagreement or refusing patches because of coding |
| 26 |
> style). |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> So yes, complaining helps to make clear what we want. Every bug report |
| 29 |
> is in fact a complaint. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> There is no rush from my side since I still use the old eclass. I was |
| 32 |
> just confused of your way to move this through which did not make |
| 33 |
> clear if you even think of reintroducing it since you said "I don't |
| 34 |
> feel like maintaining the extra code is worth the effort" and did not |
| 35 |
> respond to ulm's and my comment. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
You made it clear that the support is wanted, and I noted that. I will |
| 38 |
try to wrap up a few ideas wrt supporting shallow clones and submit |
| 39 |
them to the ml for discussion. Possibly even today. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
Best regards, |
| 43 |
Michał Górny |
Archives