After requesting a /fast track/ PR, I reported back when the hopefully
last beta was released. Part of that report indicated issues I had with
the PR process; full context at the end, but to clarify my statement...
After a hold was put on the PR, and vigorous back and forth over /two
days/ mostly clarifying your inaccurate and misleading statements (which
did help me solidify a broader understanding of the issue) you said
"What I'm missing is an analysis what is the underlying the problem". So
I provided one, which you proceeded to ignore for /three//days/.
At this point it was clear that this was a /zero risk PR to a class that
NetBeans didn't use/.
You could have said something like "I don't like this and certainly not
for 12.1". Rather you ghosted and let the clock run out. I don't expect
anything from you, but some courtesy is appreciated; IMHO, acting
professionally is not about getting paid.
-ernie
On 10/30/2020 12:45 PM, Matthias Bläsing wrote:
Am Freitag, den 30.10.2020, 12:37 -0700 schrieb Ernie Rael:
Last time I checked I'm not being paid
to work on netbeans. Even in my day job, such a request would be
appropriate for a small subset of situations and surely not for a
problem that persistet a long time.
Not sure what you're talking about here. Are you saying small problems
shouldn't be fixed?
No I read your sentence:
"no change was requested, it just ended with no responses."
as:
"I should have gotten a quicker response."
And I strongly disagree with this expectation, regarding my time
budget.
Greetings
Matthias
===== full context =====
On 10/24/2020 7:13 PM, Laszlo Kishalmi wrote:
Well, let's circulate this one for a while and see what others can
add to this one.
A system property that can change how the system works is an API
(SPI), so this one as well. It seems to be harmless, but at least
needs to be documented.
I can be convinced, my opinion on this PR in the current form is -0,
with documentation +0
If you can get some community support behind that, then I'd merge.
The most technically interesting thing I found out is that
editor.lib's BaseCaret, which this PR tweaks, is *no longer used in
NetBeans*. Apparently it's superseded by editor.lib2's EditorCaret;
which also has the drawing glitch (commentary to the contrary).
And I was wrong about the change being considered an API; it's just
not a signature API, my bad. So it's documented in the fashion of a
ClientProperty.
I'm not sure what to make of this PR's comment process. The PR was
blocked asking for changes, and after a vigorous discussion (mostly
dealing with miss-information), no change was requested, it just ended
with no responses.
I've been looking for a workaround. My latest attempt is a suitable
Halloween nightmare involving maven, ant, yenta, and a
NoClassDefFoundError.
-ernie
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
