Re: Approval for no proxy patches



Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au> writes:

> As the guy who wrote the Epiphany patch and the Galeon patch and the
> gnome-vfs patch, I can probably comment here. Mozilla does a lot of
> error checking on the string it gets for the proxies (including allowing
> for it to be empty) <insert unpleasant memories of reading the Moz
> source code here/>. So there is no real problem there, hence redundant
> error checking is left out.

Cool.  Glad to hear that.  (Might be nice to put a comment there, but
it's not my module.)

> >  * The patch to gnome-vfs is more scary, and I'm less thrilled with
> >    it. I'd really like to hear from Alex and Teuf on whether or not it's
> >    worth pushing this in.
> 
> I think it should wait for GNOME 2.6 so that we can fix the control
> centre widget to permit the setting to be correctly adjusted. I started
> to write this code, but ran out of time before feature-freeze, so I've
> moved onto other things since then.

I wouldn't hold up the feature for that.  It's a genuinely useful
feature -- even if it's a power-user one at the moment.

> With respect to this patch, could you possibly elaborate on why you are
> "less than thrilled with it". It's been through a couple of rounds of
> review (see the bug report) and is pretty well tested (including with
> IPv6) on my systems; I am using this patch every day now, since things
> are pretty unusable without it as I move between networks. I am happy to
> mess around with the patch as required to meet whatever minor complaints
> people may have -- the coding style and variable naming schemes, etc, in
> gnome-vfs is hardly a model of consistency. If you have major design
> issues, then you need to explain them to me in small words and short
> sentences, since I cannot read minds.

I'm less then thrilled with it because we're a month away from releasing
2.4 and it's not easy to just look at it and say it's obviously correct.
Still, given that its gotten testing and Alex is alright with it, I'd be
willing to let it go in.

Thanks,
-Jonathan



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