Re: bonobo-activation breaking login

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.



 mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]