Well, this shouldn't be taken too literally. I'm not even sure something like perfect code exists...
My point is more that a patch should be made good enough, in the maintainer opinion, before landing. Delaying necessary changes after the patch has been landed is not a good maintenance strategy. On 27 March 2013 22:53, James Cameron <[email protected]> wrote: > I disagree. A 90% working patch should be reviewed or even accepted, > if it improves the situation more than it degrades the situation. > > Don't let the good be the enemy of the perfect. > > In particular, if the patch fixes a high priority ticket but opens > three low priority tickets, the project has still benefited. > > Each patch mail can be considered a "release" of sorts. Releasing > early and often increases collaboration. > > -- > James Cameron > http://quozl.linux.org.au/ > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
