> Yes, I think it will be much more efficient to address these changes all at > once. I would really prefer that, if possible. > > I had seen the "reasons-to-invalidate-tickets" statement but was hoping this > was a guideline, subject to context, and not a law.
What you have to accept is that by doing everything at once you will give infinitely more work to whoever will review the ticket. If this person is doing a fair job that means hours and hours spend only to try to figure out what you are trying to do from looking at the diff, and if the person isn't doing a fair job it means that your code will get a "positive review" after a quick glance because that person does not have that much time to spend on this review (and trusts your somewhat), i.e. "bad work". If you make it reviewed by a colleague or student, I am 100% sure that it will be the latter. The guideline is not a rule, but it has not been put there for no reason either. I have had to do *very* long reviews of a diff that wasn't half as long as yours. I certainly would not start another one when, from the look of your diff file, the changes are so unrelated that you could have split it in 5 different tickets easily. Though Karl-Dieter is more optimistic, and may have more time for it. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
