are you still working on this patch?
Since your last submission there has been some feedback and I think
we've reached consensus. I am sorry that our discussion flip-flopped
a little and mislead you.
I would very much like to see a version of your patch which
incorporates the feedback you've received since your last submission.
If you don't have time or interested to work on this patch anymore
I'd like to pick it up and finish it. Else I will wait for an updated
patch from you.
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 11:18:18AM +0000, Julian Foad wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > Alexey Neyman wrote:
> >> Stefan Sperling wrote:
> >>> I'd prefer keeping --no-diff-properties and add a --patch option
> >>> later which implies --no-diff-properties and maybe other options.
> >> I was explicitly asked by Julian Foad to avoid adding more
> >> low-level options (such as --no-diff-properties) and add
> >> "interface-level" options instead. I am fine with either approach.
> Actually, my contribution to this design discussion was only to say that having a high-level option was "potentially a good direction to go [...]": <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-11/0081.shtml>.
> > I'd prefer having both low-level and high-level options available.
> > That way it is easier to tell what each individual option does.
> > Higher-level options can simply explain themselves as being
> > equivalent to some set of lower-level options.
> That sounds good to me.
> > But feel free to let us argue about it instead of getting involved
> > in the bikeshedding. We can apply your patch as-is and change the
> > option name later. It's no big deal. Before doing so I'll wait a bit
> > to see what the others have to say.
> - Julian
Received on 2012-02-01 18:53:36 CET