This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-patches@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: patch for cygpath
- To: cygwin-patches at Cygwin dot Com
- Subject: Re: patch for cygpath
- From: "Gerrit P. Haase" <gp at familiehaase dot de>
- Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 10:14:53 +0200
- Organization: Esse keine toten Tiere
- References: <3B7580AD.17089.2D0C3D51@localhost>; from gp@familiehaase.de on Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 06:59:57PM +0200
- Reply-to: gp at familiehaase dot de
Christopher Faylor schrieb am 2001-08-11, 21:41:
>On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 06:59:57PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>>Christopher Faylor schrieb am 2001-08-09, 10:45:
>>
>>>On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 01:57:53PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>>>>BTW, instead of discussing, which lasts some time, it could have been
>>>>approved and committed in the same time.
>>>
>>>Well, this is a pretty assinine comment. I'm trying to avoid code bloat.
>>
>>asinine = idiotisch; dumm
>>
>>Thank you cgf.
>
>You're perfectly welcome. If you are going to offer gratuitous
>criticisms you can expect my opinions of your criticisms to be
>forthcoming.
>
>You actually made some good points in your response. They were good enough
>that you didn't need to slam anyone with your asinine observation.
Yes, i'm sorry.
>>>I don't like to add "features" to programs if they have no real value
>>>and slow tools down.
>>>
>>>I really don't need to have my procedures criticized. Thanks.
>>
>>Big Boss, never makes a mistake, no criticism neccesary...
>
>I certainly stated my case too strongly here. I'm certainly open to
>criticism if I can discern a modicum of conscious thought behind the
>criticism. Sadly, that was lacking in this case.
>
>Would you rather that I just make unilateral decisions rather than
>discuss things? My first impulse was to just ignore the patch so
>that would not have been to your advantage.
>
>Or would you prefer that if I see a patch that troubles me in some way,
>I should just check it in automatically? Maybe that is not a big deal
>since patches are so few and far between and cygwin suffers from a
>surfeit of opinions over deeds.
AFAIK now the cygpath 'problem' is a 'bug' of windows and in this case
you acted completely correct.
>Since I had no strong opinion (or actually a slightly negative opinion),
>I asked for votes on whether the patch was worthwhile. So far the votes
>are 2-1 in favor of the patch. It looks likely that it will be included.
>
>If it isn't being included fast enough to suit you then... Gee, I guess
>I just don't care.
O.k.
gph
--
=^..^=