Jonas Hahnfeld <hah...@hahnjo.de> writes: > If I'm honest, it would help more to get reviews from people actually > looking at the code...
For some context: we are struggling to find people with experience in Windows and rlb went as deep as was possible in their limited time. I asked rlb to provide the feedback they had written informally in IRC by posting it here in the mailing list, because while this may not be an in-depth review, this can get us to the point where I — who has nil Windows knowledge but trusts review processes — can merge the patches into Guile. So if a review seems superficial, that isn’t an attack or a negative judgement of the patch quality, but rather means that someone followed up with the review due to being asked despite knowing that they couldn’t give it as much attention as it deserves — and as it would get if we could simply allocate resources. And to quote from IRC: > they have (lilypond) a few guile/C wizards there You are the experts for C on Windows and if you say that the points a reviewer worries about do not cause problems, then I take your word on that, apply the patches, run the tests on GNU/Linux, and merge them. The point of getting someone to review here is to get a second perspective that includes a different set of use-cases. Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein, ohne es zu merken. draketo.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
