Hi Alex,
On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Alexander R Angas wrote: > Regarding the type changes I made in the devel branch to fix warnings, I > will fix that. OK, thanks! > Start rant and rave: > > Can I just make a comment about this... in the last two weeks about 2 > million (OK, slight exaggeration) CVS check-ins have been made. This has > been directly before release. Not only has this been virtually impossible to > keep up with, ...Note that I can sympathize with that, that's how I felt in the weeks before Christmas... > but has been particularly infuriating around this time of year > when I at least have had very little time to check and fix things (most if > not all of us do celebrate Christmas and New Year, right?!). While that's true, it was the only time where I had at least some spare time (until this semester is over, that is). > I know Christoph has time constraints on when we can release but geez... I sent the relevant information to Matt, so you can do a 0.3.3a release without me if this should become neccessary. I'm sorry about these time constraints, I hadn't thought much about FreeSCI when choosing courses for this semester. [...] > Busting our guts to fix the event sound server directly before release was > IMHO a bad idea and only introduced problems when both Matt and I were > working on the event ss files and many commits were occurring around the > same time. I would have a commit all ready to go, then would go on-line and > find that Matt had made great advances which I didn't have much time to test > with my new code. So I re-diffed, checked things still worked briefly, and > checked the code in. This obviously didn't always work! (Especially when I > buggered up merging the code.) I guess what we can learn from this is that it's a bad idea to have two people working on the same piece of code at the same time, unless they're able to communicate with each other directly (on IRC, for example, though this may be inappropriate due to outrageous internet connection fees in some places) or agreed on a plan for this beforehand. Yes, this slows down development, but probably not as much as fixing the bugs afterwards does. > I feel it was particularly a bad idea to focus on the event ss when there is > an MCI solution for Win32 which will fix everything, ...not right away, I'd guess... > and is only a week or > two away (I started it a little while ago and have all the info I need to > finish it). Are you going to use song iterators on this? [...] > Can I also just add that I am certainly not blaming anyone here, but perhaps > we got things a bit out of perspective in some areas? That's possible; I am unable to judge how appropriate the event/polled/MCI servers are, I'm only able to guess, and I certainly don't want to decide on the direction the Win32 port is taking. This you'll have to decide between yourselves; I'll try to support whatever solution you come up with (unless it looks seriously unreasonable, of course). I do acknowledge that I'm partially to blame for instabilities propagated to the release branch, though; in the future, I will try to refrain from merging in code I'm unable to judge and test as long as there's someone else who can do that. llap, Christoph
