I know you don't disagree with the patch being rejected, but I have to say that the reviewer gave you a firm example in which your patch changes expected behavior.
Philosophy aside, that is a fine reason to reject the patch unless you can convince the reviewer (and the committee) that you are in the right (you very well may be).
When there's git cli, magit, fugitive (which you should be using if you're really really in need of a GUI (and which is also better than whatever the demo is showing))?
I'm all for paying for your tooling if you can afford it but overcharging much?
I don't have the time to find the comment now, but being the largest philanthropic donor does NOT infact make up for being an asshole or the amount of damage microsoft has done to the computing industry.
Am I downplaying his donations? Not at all. It's just that doing a good thing does not cancel out the bad.
Anyone who has taken the subway (MRT) in Singapore knows that stations definitely don't need to hot and gross. It maybe different because we don't need full HVAC but rather only air conditioning, but taking public transport has only ever been pleasant (except when it breaks down).
Maybe some principles can be applied to other subway systems?
Philosophy aside, that is a fine reason to reject the patch unless you can convince the reviewer (and the committee) that you are in the right (you very well may be).