David Roundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 06:35:53PM +0000, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote: >> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, David Roundy wrote: >>> Performance patches are *always* low priority, and should therefore >>> should only be made when they are both certain to be correct >> >> Please could you clarify what you mean by that? Much optimisation >> work will never be "certain to be correct". For example, the darcs >> annotate cache work will inevitably be too complicated to satisfy >> that criterion. Even the recent series of patches I submitted, which >> were all quite "local" in some sense, still needed some testing to >> shake out bugs, and there's certainly no absolute guarantee that >> there are none left. > > My first and absolute priority is to make darcs as bug-free as > possible. I understand that changes are necessary, and that any > change may introduce a bug, and therefore every change needs to be > carefully considered, what it's benefits are versus its risks.
Do user complaints like "darcs is too slow and we are switching to git/hg" constitute bug reports? ;-) _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
