On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > That sounds fine to me. > > But I sense there's no particular motivation to ever address this stuff - > hearing objections to even style changes. > > What is the game plan you envision then? When is it OK to touch any of > this? >
"OK"? It's always ok to *fix* it, I'm just saying it's not terribly helpful to "fix" the style errors without fixing the underlying code, and I'm saying it's not ok to just remove it because we haven't gotten around to fixing it up just yet. > Honestly the code quality in this project is not yet professional. It's better than the "professional" code I've seen in many companies whose code I've read or had to use. It has rough parts which are untended, just like codebases, except there are actually far fewer of these in our codebase, and in fact ours has the benefit of that code not actually being used right now, unlike corporate environments where the code gets embedded in some system which is in use and can *never* be removed, leaving its bugs as little time-bombs. > Its much > better than a lot of projects. But I participate to make code that is > better > than anything a professional organization is capable of. > Great, excellent. > So this sentiment is not the best to hear. This is not amateur hobby code, > it ought to be world class! > Totally agree. I just don't agree on a) how to get there, code-wise, and b) how to get there - motivation-of-contributors/commiters-wise. -jake
