On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 06:05:30PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote: > On Sun, 2009-01-04 at 23:58 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 05:40:18PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote: > > > Is it *really* so hard to understand that this whole git-serve is a > > > terrible idea? > > > > You expect me to reply to this??!? > > I expected you to reply to the other three mails where I asked the same > thing as I did in the mail you replied to. Oh, you chose not to quote > that; here it is again:
I chose not to quote that yes, as this is getting too personal for me. However, I only get more replies back which I consider of terrible quality. > > Then what happens when a new version of git with a new feature, > > incompatible with the git-serve kludge, is released? Then we're > > screwed, right? And who gets to pay? We do. We're stuck with an old > > version of git. Us. The very same people who very clearly said "git", > > not "bzr". > > But, alas, you didn't reply to this. You instead hand-waved about > something else. I don't think I breached any code of conduct, written or > otherwise, by displaying my frustration about how you are evading my > question. I am not evading. Stop trying to make this personal. I don't care about CoC, I don't like you're talking to me. Anyway, I've already asked John to respond to your point as he is doing the work. I did that before replying to you. This as I thought he would give the best answer. My answer: well, AFAIK, the communication stuff is very generic, so breakage is unlikely. Further, that is why John becomes a sysadmin. Feel free to rewrite my answer as needed. -- Regards, Olav _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
