Hi Eduardo, On 04/28/2011 06:36 PM, legutierr wrote: > This is extraordinarily discouraging.
I can understand why. I've also spent a number of hours thinking about this, reviewing the patch, considering alternatives, coming up with cases that might break, etc. I'd like to set aside those sunk costs (which I don't think were wasted in either case) and keep the focus on the best way to solve the issue in Django moving forward - that's what I owe to the rest of the core development team and to the community. > This is the second time that I > have devoted tremendous energy to a patch, trying to coordinate with > core developers, not doing any work until I get the green light from > core developers regarding an implementation plan (trying to avoid this > very same eventuality), only to be told, after working code + tests + > docs have been attached to the ticket, after several iterations of > feedback: nope, this is not the way that we want to do this policy- > wise, there's this other approach we want to take, so never mind. I'm not certain what the other situation is that you're referring to, so I can't speak to that. My observation has been that this isn't the common experience (unfortunately, getting no attention to a bug/patch in the first place has at times been a more common one, though that too is getting better -- unreviewed bug count is currently zero!), but I'm sorry you've experienced it, and I regret having contributed to it in this case. I will certainly be more careful in the future about expressing optimism that an approach might be workable, especially if (as in this case) I have reservations about it from the start. > I can understand going through the bureaucratic rigmarole that comes > with contributing to Django--in fact, I support it--but to go through > all of the discussion, justification, and *time* required to get a > simple bug fix checked in (no, this really *is* a bug--look, there are > five other tickets filed. sure, let's analyze the problem from every > angle. sure, I'll rewrite it so it matches exactly your > specifications.), only to be told that someone who wasn't even > involved in this ticket and discussion *at all* until now thinks it > isn't worth it, makes a guy like me want to tear his hair out. You > say that this is "in the best interests of Django", but you must know > that Django will suffer if people like me stop wanting to contribute > because of things like this. Indeed, and I hope that you don't lose interest in contributing. I don't think that the time spent discussing and analyzing this, even writing and reviewing a patch, is wasted. From my perspective, it has clearly revealed that the current approach of trying to do partial-model-validation is broken in concept and not reliably fixable. That's useful information, and moves us (has already moved us) towards a better solution. I can't agree that this is a simple bug fix. The current behavior is wrong in some cases. The behavior after this "fix" would still be wrong in some cases, although fewer. A simple bug fix is one where the fix is clear, obviously correct, and definitively solves the reported problem. I don't think that describes this case. Model and form validation is a complex area, and it's easy for seemingly small changes to have unintended effects that cause more maintenance burdens down the road. > How often has it been the case that some really cool new feature gets > delayed because the core developer who was working on it was unable to > dedicate the time they thought they would be able to? Can I help move > it along, can you work with me to write it? Why can't we check this > one in, close two tickets (as well as satisfying three or four > duplicates) and then move on to the more definitive fix? I'm committed to having these tickets closed one way or another before Django 1.4 is released (and neither fix here would be a candidate for backporting to a 1.3.X release anyway), so let's focus on making the best fix we can. If the ideas we have in mind for that turn out to be unworkable for some reason, I still think that the current patch would be preferable to no change. Carl -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
