I just posted a patch on this issue. Feel free to edit as necessary to match your standards. There is a clear issue with LGQ.
Cheers, Ajo. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Gilles <[email protected]>wrote: > Ted, > > > >> Did you read my other (rather more lengthy) post? Is that "jumping"? >>> >>> >> Yes. You jumped on him rather than helped him be productive. The general >> message is "we have something in the works, don't bother us with your >> ideas". >> > > Then please read all the messages pertaining to those issues more > carefully: > I never wrote such a thing (neither now nor in the past). > I pointed to a potential problem in the usage of the CM code. > I pointed (several times and in details) to problems in candidate > contributions, > with arguments that go well beyond "bad formatting". > I pointed out how we could improve the functionality _together_ (i.e. by > using > what we have, instead of throwing it out without even trying to figure out > how > good or bad it is). > > IMHO, these were all valid suggestions to be productive in helping CM to > become > better, instead of merely larger. The former indeed requires more effort > than > the latter. > > > > Gilles > > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > dev-unsubscribe@commons.**apache.org<[email protected]> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
