From koffice-devel Wed Jul 14 19:29:30 2010 From: Thomas Zander Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 19:29:30 +0000 To: koffice-devel Subject: Re: koffice/libs/kotext/styles Message-Id: <201007142129.33167.zander () kde ! org> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=koffice-devel&m=127913581819073 On Wednesday 14. July 2010 20.46.03 Cyrille Berger wrote: > I tried to read the review request. And to be honest, I didn't understand > what was the objection ? *sigh* ok, this is something between annoying and embarrassing. I wrote 4 comments on the reviewboard all inline, and I just found that only one was actually send out by email. :( :( I never found this out because after writing in a second review; "Naturally, the point of moving the 10 now in the list style to the loading code still stands :)" I got a comment indicating this line made sense to sebastian, which is confusing as the actual point referred to seems to never had reached his inbox :( > Is it just about the comment, or is there > something else ? (the commit message seems to indicate otherwise, but > honestly the review board discussion does not). Seems it doesn't add the initial objection; which I did repeat later in more detail; «Indent and list level are totally separate properties and they should not have any implied relationship.» The committing without a "ship it" and being hard to communicate with when I made my objection clear after that commit still makes me feel this is not the way we want to work and in violation of the review-board rules. > Also, reverting a patch without prior discussion is kind of rude, as is > committing before the end of the review. Or was there IRC discussions ? The revert is the direct result of me first writing; «I disagree, there are principal problems with it, I tried to make that clear on the 2 reviews I posted.» and the reply from Sebastian which used words like "pissing contest" and "should I really care". This is not the way we should work in KOffice. The review-board rules state you need a 'ship it', so while my initial objection seems to be lost this could have been corrected with minimal confusion would this rule be followed and also we would have avoided the ping- pong commits. The commit also had the immediate effect that sebastian now tries to put the burden of proof that his fix is incorrect with me. Which makes the job of reviewing his patch too much work. As the author and maintainer of that code the request to prove to sebastian that his reading of the code is not correct makes me feel quite unpleasant. So, to restore balance I think we should go back to the way it was before the review request was posted and this implies reverting the commit. Then get to a constructive way of working. -- Thomas Zander _______________________________________________ koffice-devel mailing list koffice-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel