Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Did you read what I wrote Lars? Is it my English that is so bad that
| you cannot understand it?
And reiterations cannot be tolerated?
| > And... it is better to send a patch (a patch with one part of a
| > cleanup, one logical change etc.) for review to the list, saying that
| > this will be committed in a short while "unless I get objections"
| > instead of barging on and just commiting. ("How to loose commit
| > privileges in 10 minutes 101.")
|
| And this is part of what I don't like in your attitude. You are always
| menacing, always recalling that you are the boss and the others (me)
| should do nothing but following and say "OK daddy". Sorry but I think
| you should try to open yourself to the critics sometimes.
Can you please try to keep this about the patch/review/commit
procedure, not about me.
| Please find in the archive a single patch that I committed without
| first asking the list for review.
No. And I am not talking about past patches. What I do object to is a
procdeure where "commit first and ask for forgiveness later" is the
common practice.
| > | FYI, the main reason why my patches contained more that one
| > "logical
| > | change" is that I was bitten more than once by the lengthy review
| > | process and I thought that Lars opinion was "gospel".
| > But you should still consider my opinons as strong guidelines.
|
| Now we go back two more steps.
>From what you write I got the impression that you would choose (from
Angus and Asgers mails) the procedeure: Commit first and tell people
later. It that is not the case, then my points is mooth and you have
nothing to get agitated about.
| > | Anyway, I think it's very good that the commit and review process is
| > | now agreed by everyone. It was a very interesting debate to read :-)
| > If you noticed... both what Asger said, and what Angus said, is close
| > to how we have worked for the last years... and not really different
| > from what I am saying.
|
| This very mails prove the contrary IMHO. It's surely is my bad English...
Now you lost me...
| > | So, many thanks to all and please let me the honor to put a final
| > dot
| > | at this discussion:
| > | | dot.
| > Hmm... I never read mails from bottom up...
|
| ??
|
| I was trying to end the discussion.
Yes... you say so at the bottom of the mail. But then I had already
written all the above and was not going to not send it.
so... dot.
--
Lgb
