Re: background/font capplets

[Seth Nickell <snickell stanford edu>]

I regret assuming such an inflamatory tone. Please forgive me, I don't
want to start a flamewar.

-Seth

On Tue, 2002-03-12 at 20:29, Seth Nickell wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-03-12 at 17:49, Bradford Hovinen wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-03-12 at 20:13, Seth Nickell wrote:
> > > > On the subject of the background capplet, I do not object to changing
> > > > the schemas and cleaning up the UI, but I want to see two separate
> > > > patches: one for each of those tasks. The schemas patch will most likely
> > > > go right in, while the UI patch will require a bit of tweaking on my
> > > > part before I approve it. So far, this style of presentation has not
> > > > been forthcoming.
> > > 
> > > This is silly. It means porting the existing background capplet to the
> > > new schemas, a non-trivial task. The new background capplet is basically
> > > a rewrite, and is compatible with the new schemas. "Seperating" the
> > > schemas patch from the ui patch essentially means rewriting both pieces
> > > of code, because they aren't really separable.
> > > 
> > > Please voice your supposed complaints about the combined patch and I'll
> > > try to resolve the issues. If you had just done that in the first place
> > > (weeks ago!!!) this could have *easily* been resolved by now.
> > 
> > I'm sorry it's more work for you, but that is the only condition under
> > which I will accept the patch.
> 
> This is ludicrous. I've already spent at least 4x the amount of time on
> this capplet than it took me to do the actual code. I'm tired of jumping
> through your silly hoops, and I don't believe you that the patch will be
> integrated if I (for unknown reasons) write seperate schemas fixing and
> UI fixing code. The only reason I can think of for that is you intend to
> reject the UI changes. I feel very much like I'm being (and have been)
> played.
> 
> If this were any non-core module I would have said "fuck you" about a
> month ago, but unfortunately my users are subjected to your module in a
> major way whether I (and they) like it or not.
> 
> I think its totally pointless for me to spend time porting the old
> capplet to the new schemas (I don't even want to think about the merge
> conflicts I'll be generating...against myself!), but I guess you have me
> over a barell, and I'll do it. BUT, only if there's a crystal clear
> public understanding that you will accept the UI changes in short order.
> And short order really had better mean SHORT ORDER.
> 
> You get your power trip, I get my UI changes. That's my offer.
> 
> -Seth