From: <ste...@gm...> - 2007-04-09 15:40:39
|
The other problem no-one has mentionned is the longer a patch sits, the more likely there will be conflicts when it comes time to apply it. Stephane On 4/9/07, Richard Bos <ml...@ra...> wrote: > Op Monday 09 April 2007 12:15:12 schreef bm...@ca...: > > if after 1 month or 6 months, you don't anymore know what a patch/feature > > request/bug submit is for, or are not interested in it anymore, the > > patch/feature is clearly not worthy of inclusion in GRAMPS or the bug not > > that important. > > That's not what I stated. If it takes too long, it is harder for the patch > provider to know why he solved it this way. Like for me, with the patch I > provided I won't know why I had to swap the arguments in the function call. > If you ask me now, I'll know next week I won't. That does not mean that the > patch is bad or not desired (other people already expressed their wish to see > it included). I'm involved in quite some projects so I know very well how to > deal with bugs/features reports/requests. > > -- > Richard Bos > We are borrowing the world of our children, > It is not inherited from our parents. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > |