Since I'm in the mood to share my opinions today... :) On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Peter Clifton <[email protected]> wrote: > It might seem unfair that we're (or I am) trying to third party > contributions to a higher standard than some of PCB's existing legacy > code, but assuming it doesn't completely stifle contribution, > encouraging high standard commits should aid PCB's long term quality. >
I think holding new additions, either from third parties or the devs, to a higher standard than existing code is a good thing. > On the other hand, I am reluctant to bash down people's patch > contributions with continual bombardment to polish them endlessly. > Falling back to the "I'm busy" stance is lots less confrontational than > me batting the patch back to you and demanding revisions before I apply > it. > > Perhaps we should just apply the patch as is, and catch any bugs (if) > they appear. I don't want to discourage future contributions. > I think your email is a great response to KMK and loads better than ignoring it, saying "I'm busy," or even applying it without being happy with it. I don't think it is inappropriate for devs to require contributors to follow guidelines and a certain standard (to a certain extent). It would be nice if we could agree on a standard format and process, which I guess is part of DJ's plan. Jared _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
