|
From: Michael B. <mb...@di...> - 2009-11-17 19:50:31
|
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 19:28, David Brownell <da...@pa...> wrote: > On Tuesday 17 November 2009, Michael Bruck wrote: >> >> A good opportunity for the latter would be when >> >> Tcl objects are added and these functions become methods of target >> >> objects. >> > >> > That doesn't seem like such a good opportunity; it's off in the vague >> > future. I'd rather just prevent trivially obvious wrongness from >> > getting merged in the first place. >> >> >> It is functional as it is and can be of use to users. It may be a >> problem in multi-core systems, but that is merely a restriction and >> doesn't make it unusable. Nothing prevents you from providing a patch >> that includes the restructuring that you want. > > Or following standard patch review+merge policies and suggesting > that the original submitter resolve that issue before it's merged. > > Because that *is* a standard process. Post a patch you'd like to > see merged ... accept feedback ... resubmit ... repeat till merged. I questioned your feedback, not the process. Michael |