Dnia 2014-02-24, o godz. 13:04:13 hasufell <[email protected]> napisał(a):
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > Michał Górny: > > Dnia 2014-02-24, o godz. 01:18:49 hasufell <[email protected]> > > napisał(a): > > > >> But to make it more clear to you: I don't think that removing > >> shallow clone support is an improvement, so I vote against > >> removing it. > > > > Then please provide patches that add proper support for that. The > > changes were necessary to fix repeatedly reported bugs/requests > > while the shallow clone code conflicted with them. > > > > I will be happy to re-introduce them when I have time and proper > > design. Complaining isn't going to help, you know. > > > > I might, but before working on something it has to be discussed first. > I won't put effort into something without knowing if it's for nothing > (e.g. maintainer disagreement or refusing patches because of coding > style). > > So yes, complaining helps to make clear what we want. Every bug report > is in fact a complaint. > > There is no rush from my side since I still use the old eclass. I was > just confused of your way to move this through which did not make > clear if you even think of reintroducing it since you said "I don't > feel like maintaining the extra code is worth the effort" and did not > respond to ulm's and my comment. You made it clear that the support is wanted, and I noted that. I will try to wrap up a few ideas wrt supporting shallow clones and submit them to the ml for discussion. Possibly even today. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
