Hey Jb, Sorry dude, but this wasn't a large changeset.
If the definition of a large changeset is a patch which adds a large set of unit tests, then I'm guilty as charged. Apart from removing a few extra tabs (my mistake), everything I changed is documented in the changelog and covered by unit tests or standalone tests. There's only one part of the patch that could be committed separately, and this is the change to ClientConfigurationSystem. And again, this change fixes a failing standalone test (t28). Please be reasonable. What more can you ask? Gert -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jb Evain Sent: donderdag 26 juni 2008 15:11 To: Gert Driesen Cc: Atsushi Eno; mono-devel-list Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] [Fwd: [Mono-patches] r106626 - in trunk/mcs/class/System.Configuration: . System.Configuration Test/System.Configuration Test/standalone] Hey, On 6/26/08, Gert Driesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Even only with that point, I'm pretty much tempted to revert your > > changes. > > > Yeah, I'm glad my (any?) contributions are that much appreciated. Come on Gert, it's definitely not the first time that you're told that your commits are: * totally not atomic, * mixing totally different concerns, And for some of us that keep an eye on the code coming in, it makes that task much harder. That doesn't mean that we don't appreciate contributions. But once again, I already told you that I was not happy with the way you're making commits, and am not the first one. And I can certainly understand the maintainer frustration to see this huge changeset coming in. -- Jb Evain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
