On 3/11/14 1:20 PM, John H Palmieri wrote: > > > On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 12:40:41 PM UTC-7, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > > On that note, I think reviewers shouldn't hold up tickets because > they > > don't like the current implementation without providing a working > > alternative and can demonstrate why it's better. > > Do you think that a patch should automatically be merged when it has been > waiting for a reviewer for a long time ? > > > With regards to #10963, the ticket had been reviewed and indeed had gotten a > positive review, and then some other people looked at it and started asking > questions. So Nicolas is not trying to bypass > the review process, but rather trying to sort out a disagreement among the > various participants on the ticket. That's probably too brief to adequately > summarize what's going on, but anyway, I think > your question is not really relevant to this particular ticket.
I agree with John. I actually think Nicolas is quite patient trying to answer all questions. My suggestion would be either for Volker to implement his alternative on a different ticket, so we can see it in action and test it, or to let Nicolas' patch go in (provided of course that there are no real issues, but rather only technical disagreements about the implementation details). If we do not have Volker's alternative and we want this feature in sage, then I think the only way one could vote is for Nicolas' patch to get in! And I think we do want this feature in Sage! Best, Anne -- 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.
