kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>Branko Čibej <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
>
>
>>>>I think you need to "get with the boys" on this one. Branko clearly
>>>>states, "...because even a technically perfect patch wouldn't be
>>>>accepted if style wasn't correct" which is contrast to what you are
>>>>saying above. I think one of the minor problems is there isn't an
>>>>official stance on the matter and it's up to an individual committer as
>>>>to how much effort they are willing to expend.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>No, "the boys", or rather, the boy, needs to get with me :-).
>>>
>>>Branko was simply wrong. And I'll bet he will admit that if he
>>>happens read this followup. (*He* might not apply such a patch, but
>>>many, many such patches have been applied. And, actually, he probably
>>>would too, if it were good in other ways.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Oh well, to quote my original response to Mark:
>>
>>
>>
>>>But I certainly see the techincal side as being more important than
>>>the stylistic side; if I didn't, I'd have made the final tweaks
>>>myself and committed the patch by now.
>>>
>>>
>>So it seems that a lot of this conversation ie about something that
>>hasn't happened, nor is it likely to happen.
>>
>>
>
>Do you mean you never said "...because even a technically perfect
>patch wouldn't be accepted if style wasn't correct", which you were
>quoted as saying?
>
>
I said both, and you're right, I /said/ "accepted" but /should/ have
said "committed". With that mistake take care of, are the two statements
still inconsistent?
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 27 08:09:42 2005