On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 03:40, Bernie Innocenti <[email protected]> > wrote: > > El Mon, 12-10-2009 a las 22:36 -0400, Bernie Innocenti escribió: > >> Hello, > >> > >> Michael just passed by the Acetarium and, since the dinner was late, we > >> found the time to test and review his latest prototype^W patch. > >> > >> I'm loving how the menus suddenly are now snappy and responsive. Please, > >> test it yourself and report back. If we like this change, I think we > >> should go on and also kill the code that this patch makes redundant. > >> (please, let's not add another configurable knob!) > > > > BTW, Michael and I have a "small disagreement" on how a maintainer > > should react to the present patch. From a purely functional PoV, this > > patch is short, correct and low impact. Yeah, but... who's ever going to > > clean up after it if we do not demand the cleanup to be merged > > atomically with the patch that opens the need for it? Once the patch is > > in, the maintainer would no longer have a stick to brandish while saying > > "now eat your veggies!". > > > > (Michael replies: "This is a flawed position because it leads to absurd > > conclusions. More specifically, it actively discourages the current > > contributor from submitting more patches by denying the satisfaction of > > seeing their existing patch merged, delays the deferral of a correct and > > believable patch that introduces behavior you yourself describe as > > 'desirable' and, last but not least, misses an opportunity to involve > > inexperienced contributors by providing appropriate "on-ramp" bugs like > > the proposed refactoring.) > > I'm more concerned about developers proposing big user experience > changes because they feel it's better. Before I look at the patch I > would like to know if there's agreement from people close to our users > that this behavior change is desired. How can we get that? > People could take both versions to a group of kids and video how it goes. > > Thanks, > > Tomeu > > -- > «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar. > What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David > Farning > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > -- Caroline Meeks Solution Grove [email protected] 617-500-3488 - Office 505-213-3268 - Fax
_______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
