From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7C8F138334 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2019 11:49:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CEF41E092D; Sat, 21 Dec 2019 11:49:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5778AE08D9 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2019 11:49:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-98-218-46-55.hsd1.md.comcast.net [98.218.46.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mjo) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27C3234D1CA for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2019 11:49:55 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 0/3] elisp{,-common}.eclass update for emacs-vcs consolidation To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <3002c804-e70f-5b50-ee38-d91aa7e22fb0@gentoo.org> From: Michael Orlitzky Message-ID: Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2019 06:49:53 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 650e6f70-33ac-407d-9fcf-4b668e81466f X-Archives-Hash: adb30bc548dfe8e1bb6188905489083c On 12/21/19 6:39 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 21 Dec 2019, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > >> I was being safe, and assuming that your standards for shell scripting >> are as low as your standards for tree quality. > > Nice, resorting to a personal attack when out of arguments. :( > And for the record, commenting on standards in response to a series of commits that display low standards is not a personal attack.