Hi Manuel, > So when you complain about why I do change things and that I'm > breaking legacy, well, that's often a bad thing to do when the old > group of developers is present, to not disrupt things. When people > come afresh into a [somewhat] dead project, revisiting old decisions > and practices (part of refactoring) usually helps to improve overall > quality, but most importantly make the new people more intimately know > the code and better prepared to fix the present and upcoming problems. > And helps to establish the "new legacy", instead of having to cope > forever with the legacy established by others and that the new ones > necessarily do not agree with. >
I am not sure which comments you are refering to here as I never mentioned "breaking legacy". Some of your changes made large, non-functional modifications to established code (dangerous; can introduce hard-to-detect bugs), and others were made in a *style* that is inconsistent with the rest of the code (which is very easy to change). I am not at all opposed to making improvements to the code. I am sorry if you have gotten that impression. Are you considering to stay on? If so, I will gladly take the time to address the rest of your comments. _______________________________________________ Aptitude-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel
