Re: bonobo-activation breaking login
- From: Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>
- To: Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>
- Cc: Luis Villa <louie ximian com>, GNOME Desktop List <desktop-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: bonobo-activation breaking login
- Date: 22 Oct 2002 10:33:39 +0100
On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 12:22, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> Luis was not attacking you for the breakage
Which is good, since I didn't break it ;-)
> merely asking that it be fixed,
> and noting that we ought to try our best to keep CVS testable and buildable
> as much as possible. It's a worthy goal, but there's little need to put up
> straw man arguments when we don't reach it.
Straw man arguments ? I'm just trying to understand the rebuke for:
"[this change]... breaks the 'CVS must always be buildable and testable'
philosophy ...". As I say:
> > If it becomes mandatory to re-login on pain of screaming per
> > check-in I suspect that very little work will get done in fact.
Which (to re-iterate) is to let you know - that the goal is worthy
(perfection) - and better we're all in agreement with it; but it's
fundamentally un-reachable. No straw men to batter there I hope.
"It isn't Cool(tm)" [TM] - to tell people they're breaking the devel
philosophy when they commit a big fix that has the odd issue.
> It's okay to break the tree every now and then.
Fine - as long as we understand and accept that we won't be unduly
surprised by such things. Clearly it's vital to fix such things fast.
> It's also okay to point it out to maintainers and others so we can
> get it back on track.
Of course. I'm only really interested in ensuring that your
expectations of what is possible / likely in a devel branch are
accurate, so comments can be constructive.
Regards,
Michael.
--
mmeeks gnu org <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]