[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-commits
Subject:    Re: koffice/kword/part/frames
From:       Inge Wallin <inge () lysator ! liu ! se>
Date:       2010-08-30 9:50:17
Message-ID: 201008301150.18260.inge () lysator ! liu ! se
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday, August 30, 2010 11:04:10 zander@kde.org wrote:
> On Monday 30. August 2010 10.49.08 Inge Wallin wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 29, 2010 23:02:38 Thomas Zander wrote:
> > > SVN commit 1169681 by zander:
> > > 
> > > Revert "Revert commit 1158423"
> > > 
> > > This fixes crashes, so reinstating it as its known to work well.
> > 
> > > Conflicts:
> > Sigh...
> > 
> > Instead of reverting the reverted reversions ad infinitum, could we
> > perhaps have communication and end with a patch that solves *both* the
> > crashes and the background image issues?
> 
> The background stuff was disabled by casper in rev 1161540, and even after
> asking again and again there are no unit tests that show how this feature
> is supposed to work (notice you can't enable this feature from the UI
> either).
> 
> Blaming the maintainer for maintaining the code and apparently blaming me
> for breaking your feature that didn't work anyway and was not made
> maintainable in the first place does give me the impression that, yes, we
> need communication. But not the kind that starts with "sigh" like your
> mail does..

I can see how my mail gave the impression that I was complaining on you alone.  
That was not the intention, sorry.  I just think these chains of reversions 
are unproductive.  And it *was* your patch that started the breakage if I 
remember correctly.

> I intend to get this to work correctly and that includes refactoring, if
> your feature breaks because there are no unit tests, don't blame me
> because I insisted on those being written a LOT of times.

Point taken; let's create some tests.

That said, I also think that if you know that a feature will break because of 
your patch, it would be nice to put it up for review even if you are the 
maintainer.  
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]