Hi Stijn,
Let me state this first and foremost: no one doubts the fact that they
are (vast) improvements and I personally also don't doubt that they have
been implemented in a clean and correct way. Sadly enough that is not
the real problem.
The general problem is that, even if we change something very small,
that may have an impact on packages developed by other people.
Especially in core packages like the repository. A single variable extra
here or there, an additional method in one data-manager might not be a
big deal on it's own, but all combined, eventually it may become a problem.
The stable was intended to be the version people (who for a variety of
reasons don't have the time or resources to follow up on the
dev-branches) can use to develop their packages. Continuous small
changes will eventually force them to apply those changes as well.
I realize that there is a very fine line between dev and stable right
now when it comes down to pseudo-features and/or usability ... but let's
keep the butterfly effect in mind ;-)
If support issues are wrongly tagged as features, just have them changed
to usability or even bug. Refactoring however, remains a big nono on the
stable. Even if it's a relatively small change ... small changes will
grow up and become big changes :-P
Apart from that I can only hope that every developer will exercise
caution in evaluating whether or not something should be on stable or
dev. The "rules" aren't set in stone and everything is negotiable ...
but if we expect others to live by the rules, we should at least try to
follow them ourselves. Regardless of local live-systems, pilot projects
and/or possible customers.
Rainy regards,
Hans
On 28/07/2011 12:19, Stijn Van Hoecke wrote:
I am willing to provide some more information on my push.
What I did was a small fix to usability rather than implement entirely new
features (the issue was somewhat wrongly tagged).
The commit message states:
implemented Feature #3656: duplicate CO
-> added duplicate button to repository browser
-> added rename functionality to content object copier
-> refactored title exists check: moved from ajax to datamanager
1st -> ) I've added the duplicate button to the repo browser as a shortcut for uploading
multiple objects that have the same basis. This was the issue stated on the support site and
took exactely 1 line to implement since the content object copier already existed. You could
achieve the exact same by sharing the object with yourself, giving copy right, and copy it
to your own repository. I find this solution somewhat more "clean".
2nd -> ) When you copy a content object with the previously added button, you
end up with two identical objects you can only tell apart by the modification
time. This upgrade of the content object copier adds an optional parameter (so it
doesn't break a thing) that puts an index after the title if it already exists.
Because you want to duplicate the object for further editing, this increases
usability.
3rd -> ) The code for the existing title check was implemented in the
ajax-classes. Moving them to the mdb2-classes makes it reusable and therefore
better.
So I made 2 usability improvements (somewhat wrongly tagged as feature in my
opinion) and some refactoring to make the code even better :-)
Kind regards,
Stijn Van Hoecke
----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
Unless I'm mistaken I distinctly remember an agreement to *not* implement NEW features on the
stable branches? On top of that I also remember "some people" not being very happy when
"some other people" did implement some small additions on the stable branch.
Can anyone (as in: not necessarily he who pushed it) provide the community with
a valid reason for these new features on the stable branch?
Thanks,
Hans
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
Dev@lists.chamilo.org
http://lists.chamilo.org/listinfo/dev
