Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> writes:
> Where is the evidence? You say remote-hg doesn't work, I say it does,
> the difference is that I have evidence to prove it.
There are many projects that don't do what they claim. I gave remote-hg
a few minutes and moved on since (at the time) it didn't seem
interesting enough to be worth the effort of making proper bug reports.
There's a lot of low-quality code in the world and I'm willing to
tolerate a certain false-positive rate. I apologize for misdiagnosing
your project and I'm happy to believe that you have since fixed the
bugs. I was merely answering you question of why some of us contributed
to gitifyhg in preference to remote-hg.
I see no value in dwelling on the value judgement I made a few months
ago. Additionally, I have almost no use for either project any more.
> remote-hg doesn't fail with the non-fast-forward error, in fact, it
> doesn't fail at all, it pushes correctly, and that's reported as a
I don't agree that force-pushing by default is "correct" behavior.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html