Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2013, #05; Mon, 15)

[Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Phil Hord <phil.hord@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Felipe Contreras

>> Yes please. Show me one of the instances where you hit a bisect with
>> any of the remote-hg commits mentioned above by Thomas Rast.
>
> I made no such claim.  In fact, I have never bisected to any
> remote-hg-related commit.  I fail to see the relevance of this
> qualifier, though.

Here, this is what you said:

You:
> Me:
>> [skipping irrelevant comments]
>>
>> I'm sorry, did you actually hit an issue that required to look at the
>> commit message to understand where the issue came from? No? Then I
>> won't bother with hypotheticals.
>>
>> If you want to waste your time, by all means, rewrite all my commit
>> messages with essays that nobody will ever read. I'm not going to do
>> that for some hypothetical case that will never happen. I'm not going
>> to waste my time.
>
> This is not a hypothetical.

If something is not hypothetical, it's real, which means it actually
happened, but then you said you never made the claim that it did. So
what is it? Either it did happen, or it didn't; you cannot have your
cake and eat it.

If you are going to change your claims on the fly, and deny you ever
made them, I don't see much point in discussing with you.

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras