Bo Peng wrote:
I am quite busy recently and have not been actively testing a few
patches that I should have looked at (middle button paste, latex_lang,
no spell checking etc). But I felt that I have to take a side in this
debate this time. Maybe surprisingly, I am at Lar's side.
I am not sure how many active developers were there in the pre-1.5
cycles but there has been many new comers (like me) in the 1.5 cycle.
While I agree that 1.5.0 is far better than 1.4.x, it was mostly
unusable during development,
That's not really true. It is mostly unstable during the unicode
transition, that's all.
Look, I am not going to discuss this more, I'll answer you here and then
I'll stop.
To summarize, I am simply not going to double my workload to respect the
1.4cvs rules that are apparently coming back. You think that 1.5 was
slow coming? Then you should review the 1.4 development process. The 1.5
development process was an order of magnitude faster and the resulting
code is much *cleaner* than the 1.4 one. I reckon that this is because
of the increased liberty. I am _not_ going to send patches for each and
every cleanup I'll maybe doing in the 1.6 cycle. The svn log and trac
diff are there to review for all. One commit can be reverted if it is
found bad. You say that two people must work at the same time on a
single change. I say: this is not practical and this will hamper
development. I am not very interested in new feature. I like cleaning
things and the LyX source code is full of things to cleanup.
If there is a consensus that the old patch review process before
committing should come back, then I'll just stop development in trunk. I
simply cannot afford the double effort for no fun in exchange. It'll be
easier for everybody.
Abdel.
