Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > | > Here is the rewrite of updateLabel I have been coming up with. I think
| > | > the approach is sound, and anyway we have to cleanup the current mess
| > | > (full of xxx_CODE). Please have a look, I'd like to commit it "soon".
| > | > I am sure it has some small bugs, but I am confident they can be
| > | > worked around. OTOH, if someone points out a more fundamental problem,
| > | > I'll hold it.
| > | | One minor comment: your patch will most certainly conflict with
| > my MVC
| > | branch. If you have 10 minutes, could you please have a look at it and
| > | merge it before you apply your patch?
| > I really wanted to stay out of this, but I just can't...
|
| Lars is your name :-)
|
| > This is _not_ the way to work with branches. You as the branch owner
| > must do the work of splitting up your (now quite huge I guess) patch,
| > show it to others, make it palatable for them and do the commit.
|
| I've explained long and large many times what this is about. I am not
| going to split my branch in patches, otherwise doing work in branch
| has zero benefits.
Not true.
| My svn logs are always very verbose so one should
| be able to understand each and every commits if he'd like to,
| including you.
Beside the point.
--
Lgb
