Re: [PATCH] space on prompt bugfix

Hi Oswald,

On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 22:56, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> of course not. i had a look and have not found something fundamentally
> broken about it. if a "real" mc developer would do the same, it should
> be totally sufficient.

I'm not sure if I would qualify.

> this paranoid checking policy doesn't get us anywhere but to the current
> state of stagnation.

Bollocks. If you hadn't noticed pchel and I have done quite a lot of
work this way the last half year of 2004. It's just that there don't
seem to be many people that want to be the second pair of eyes to check
patches. I believe double verification is a good policy to avoid silly
mistakes. This might be a rather trivial patch, so yes, I could have
committed it. Maybe I'm a bit too cautious at times. Must be my lack of
formal training that makes me a bit uncertain about these issues at
times. Otoh in all these months nobody seems to have cared just to take
a look for a second and reply that they thought the thing was ok.

>  head is there for being broken once in a while. and
> if you find yourself in the situation that you cannot break head because
> people are relying on it's stability, you should seriously reconsider
> your release policy ...

I was intending to commit this to PRE as well.

> > and agree it should be committed?
> > 
> sure

Right. Thanks. I'll commit it to PRE and HEAD then. Tomorrow. Or the day


mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research

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