Subject: RE: To 0.7.9 or to not 0.7.9 (was Re: PATCH (4): Insert Symbol again.)
From: Thomas Fletcher (thomasf@qnx.com)
Date: Thu Apr 13 2000 - 07:16:54 CDT
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Bruce Pearson wrote:
> I may be able to do this for windows, but before I can decide how much work
> is involved I need the following;
>
> 1) How do I apply a patch (eg. insert_symbol.patch8)
> 2) Is a screen shot available of the Insert symbol dialog.
Just to add my two cents in here. As a developer, I don't
feel very comfortable with having to work off of independant
patches from people. The way that I prefer to add in the
functionality to the ports that I've worked on is to rely
on what is in CVS for other platforms as a basis for the
design of my dialog. For example, when sam added the word
count dialog ... as soon as it was in CVS and there was a
screen shot checked into the shots directory it gave me
1) a visual idea of what I have to work with 2) a **working**
example of what is being done on at least one other platform.
I think that the idea that people should be culling the list
to retreive patches from contributors that haven't been
rolled into the mainstream CVS is just ridiculous ... and
it totally voids the use of CVS to synchronize source.
As soon as I add a patch ... then my local CVS repository
is now out of sync with everyone except for the patch
originator ... who will presumably continue work on his
code to adjust/improve/bug fixe etc. Now instead of staying
in sync with a known baseline (CVS) I've got to both follow
CVS and this developer.
This is a nightmare of management for me attempting to
maintain another platform as a single developer ... but
it is even worse when you have multiple developers.
My suggestion is to set a tag in cvs to indicate the
point at which we want to cut releases. We can do
everything possible to keep the distance between the
platforms to a minimum when this is done ... but the
_only_ way to do this in my opinion is to accept and
merge worthy patches into CVS, then work hard to
eliminate discrepancies between code which is checked
into the repository.
Under no conditions will I attempt to "keep up" with
continuing patches for a feature which are sent to
the list. If I'm working independantly with another
developer to add a feature that is differnt and it
is somewhat more manageable ... but really folks
lets use CVS for what it was designed for.
Thomas ... who votes to add the patch and work like
hell to get CVS code based matched up.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Apr 13 2000 - 07:17:04 CDT