2013.09.04 14:00 "Re: [Tiff] memory management function calls", by Chris Liddell
On 04/09/13 14:48, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
I'm not keen on the change, but I'm not necessarily fighting it.
Well, I'd be unsurprised to see (and half expect) the patch rejected.
Don't assume that your patch will be rejected due to our sluggishness at accepting it.
That wasn't my intent: I meant due to insufficient benefit perceived for the extent of the changes, or dislike of the tack I'd taken in the implementation.
I don't have a problem with it being rejected for those reasons, but I was concerned (due to the lack of responses) that referring to a browsable git repo for a first review wasn't liked. I wouldn't like it to be rejected because of that.