>> Thanks for the explanation. I think it underlines well the A)
>> technical issues (quality commits) and the B) social issues (ability
>> to communicate in a friendly way & respond constructively), which we
>> discovered are both *essential* for contributing to git.
> I'm not entirely convinced of that: there is something akin to drop-dead
> gorgeous code: code that is so well done that it would not matter with
> regard to its maintenance whether or not its author dropped dead because
> it's both done well as well as documented in a manner where the original
> author could not offer significant additional help.
I think this only means that you can get away with B issues if A's
quality is very very very high, which doens't happen very often. And I
doubt that you will be able to get away with it for long anyway, at
some point some mechanism will be put in place so the downsides of B
aren't visible to everyone... for example with the patches being sent
to one person only and this person relays it to the list while
filtering B's issues.
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