On 09/11/11 16:16, Mike Blumenkrantz wrote: > I'm fairly certain that his objection is not to the API or features it > introduces, but for the timetable and lack of PUBLIC review for such a huge > patch. You continue to claim that "it's tiny" and "it only affects you if you > are using the features it introduces". Both of these are false claims which > have been disproved by me and others. > We have less than two weeks until the 1.1 release. Prior to this addition, EFL > and Edje were considered by everyone in the community be stable and in good > shape. This is no longer the case, and I'm sure there are many others aside > from Vincent who would agree with this sentiment. >
I concur. > I vote that the sound API and all related commits be reverted immediately and > pushed off until after 1.1. Regardless of your expertise on sound > implementations and how solid you may claim it to be, this feature CANNOT be > tested sufficiently to meet EFL quality standards before the release. That > alone > should be enough to have ensured that it was never committed in the first > place, other breakages notwithstanding. > No idea what needs to be done about it, but the current situation is indeed problematic. -- Tom. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
