Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Georg, as JMarc, you talk about "other people's unfinished stuff". If > you want to blame someone please cite the developer in question and the > associated stuff. Sending out sentences like this doesn't help anybody.
Do I really need to list these things? I thought they where well known. Some of them are (in no particular order): - listings: too complicated code, strange user interface - 4 build systems, none of them works correctly - unicode transition: this is not completed, people do even add new instances of utf8/file system encoded strings - persistent selection: This was a clear design until shortly before 1.5.0 it was found out that it caused a lot of slowdown. Since then it is an adhoc solution that nobody understands. - drawing/metrics machinery: a mishmash of old and new design, and the new design is very little documented (a description of partly implemented design goals on the mailing list does not count). Look for example at the Update::flags enum: completely undocumented. This is not as bad as I thought some time ago, but nevertheless not finished. - getStatus/dispatch machinery: The old design is partly destroyed, a new one is not in sight. Note that I do not want to blame anybody (hence no names), but this list + the fact that I finished similar things in the past is a very good reason not to come back. >> but you write "I don't think the bug >> will be solved soon", > > Please re-read what I said: "we should do the same for *branch* as I > don't think the bug will be solved soon. I see no difference. >> so obviously it has a low priority for you, > > That's obvious only to you. Look at what I wrote in bugzilla. I saw that. You did some diagnostic work, but at the time I wrote the above there was no sign that you will do more, and together with the cited sentence this looked as if you were not looking at this in the near future. Georg
