On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:00:59PM +0100, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Still, really. I can re-read your poll a thousand times, and all I see is
> "he does not want to change his branch despite the reviewer's remark,
> so he tries to force it with a poll".
Forcing? Hmm. To force anything, I would need to have coercive power
on the community, which I certainly don't. You can see from the rest
of the post that I tried very hard to *not* put a bias in the
outcome. And if you want to know the details, I did get in touch
personally with a couple developers, asking them to "read the post,
forge your own opinion and vote accordingly; or don't vote!".
A very good measure of my lack of coercive power, and in general the
resilience of our community to pressures of all sorts, is that many
people expressed opinions, but no one voted. That's fine! Actually I
expected that: I trust people in our community to only vote if they
have a strong opinion. And it's very hard to forge oneself a strong
opinion in such a situation.
A couple other notes:
- I gladly made changes when I was convinced by them.
- It's not a change I think should be done and am just lazy to
implement. It's a change I dislike (sorry to have opinions)!
> > I already broke it down and got merged a bunch of stuff that could go
> > in earlier. Just look at the dependency list: #11224, #8327, #10193,
> > #12895, #14516, #14722, #13589, #14471, #15069, #15094, #11688,
> > #13394, #15150, #15506, #15757, #15759 (not all are mine). The list
> > does not even show dependencies like #11935 or #715 by Simon, which
> > were developed outside of the Sage-Combinat queue, and took a *long*
> > time to fix because they were *hard*.
>
> Well, I regret that all those persons had to base their own work on a
> patch that it not in yet.
The list above is about tickets #10963 depended on. Not the tickets
that depend on it. I was arguing that I had indeed been doing
iterative development.
> If it is that fundamental, please don't include a piece of code
> that you A think is not good enough or will have to be changed.
For whatever it's worth, *I* think it's good enough. And don't worry
too much, it's been one of the most reviewed patch around.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-combinat-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
