On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Gabriele Svelto <gsve...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> > Respectively, it seems like these requests were ultimately not included > > in the final decision. > > I would like to know why; I think that's not much to ask. I would also > like to know why this decision was made without any public discussion. > As I've pointed out the removal of another widget was discussed on this > list only a few months ago. > > The gonk widget is made of roughly 60K lines of code out of the 14 > million lines of our codebase is made of[1]. It's not a large number > both in absolute and relative terms and also well contained so why can't > it be kept around? > https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?q=gonk seems to contradict your assertion that gonk is well-contained. There are literally references to gonk throughout the tree. Every reference that isn't self-contained introduces cognitive dissonance when someone encounters it. They have to consider the existence of gonk when reading and changing the code. This makes changing code harder and undermines the ability for Firefox/Gecko to "evolve quickly." Even the very presence of unused, self-contained code (like gonk widgets) adds overhead because it can make common operations like refactoring more time consuming. And if someone breaks the code (because it isn't used) and a bug gets filed to track that, now you've introduced overhead for people to triage said bugs. These problems don't exist when the code doesn't exist. That's why we should aggressively delete unused and unsupported code. _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
