On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Leandro Lucarella <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm just saying > that the patch was mostly turned down because he didn't asked for other > devs permission to make the patch, not because of the quality of the patch > (or the feature) itself. That discourages people to make patches, and > I think that's *really* bad.
Don may have said that not discussing a change before submitting a patch for it dooms the patch to failure, but I don't think that's true at all. I think it just means that the chances the patch will solve the problem in a way that is agreeable to those who matter is much smaller. But if Chad had managed to hit on the magic formula that everyone thought was a great solution, I think the patch would have been accepted (after some inevitable discussion). In this case, had Chad discussed the matter first, I think he would have quickly found that there was little support for his syntax extension, and he could have saved himself the trouble of implementing it. --bb
