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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: Integrated subset of make_it_cool
From:       Carsten Burghardt <burghardt () kde ! org>
Date:       2002-12-31 5:38:00
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Dienstag, 31. Dezember 2002 04:28 schrieb Don Sanders:
> On Tuesday 31 December 2002 01:46, Carsten Burghardt wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 26. Dezember 2002 09:32 schrieb don@sanders.org:
> > > Any new major bugs. I guess in a change this large there will
> > > definitely be small bugs, I don't know of any outstanding ones,
> > > but I'm sure there will be some. I don't see this as a reason not
> > > to commit as the integration actually fixes some very serious
> > > bugs. Including the two outstanding major bugs in HEAD.
> >
> > There is a pretty simple reason why that shouldn't be done: because
> > bigger patches need to be posted _before_ you commit them. Or did
> > that rule changed while I was on vacation?
>
> For a long time I was the only person working on KMail, during that
> time of course I did not ask anyone for permission before I
> committed.
>
> As others joined the project I peer reviewed their work before it was
> committed to cvs, especially during feature freeze, and that is how
> the policy of commits being reviewed came about.

Oh come on, I'm not interested in how things started or have been.

> Now I am quite happy to engage in this activity myself if it is
> productive. But KMail's development had staganated and my changes
> have been and are being obstructed for political rather than
> technical reasons.

That is not correct and you should know that.

> Now I will act in the best interest of the users, and in this case
> that means having zero tolerance for politically based obstruction,
> ignoring such intereference and committing code that benefits the
> users to cvs.
>
> So the answer to your question is since it became in the best interest
> of the users.

But this is not the way it works. The features your're implementing are for 
the users, that is correct. But why do you think that your code is perfect 
and without bugs that could be found by reviewing?
Take mozilla as an example. Every single patch has to be approved by the 
maintainer of the particular part and by the maintainer of the (sub)project. 
And mozilla doesn't seem to stagnate.

Regards,

Carsten
_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]