Dave Shield wrote:
But I'd naively hoped that people here might have tried out the new implementation to see whether it worked *before* deliberately trying to break it!This code has been available for almost three weeks now, and so far it has been met with quibbles, resistance and other forms of obstruction. I've had a grand total of *one* person who seems interested in actually trying out the basic functionality. Grrrr! In principle, this project encourages developers to commit work as early as possible, so that others have the opportunity to look over the changes, and offer suggestions. In practice, this project *actually* encourages developers to sit on work and polish it for as long as possible, since any minor deficiencies will be jumped on immediately. Argghhhh!!!!
I'm just reporting issues as I come across them (here: when working on automated build testing) rather than trying to offend anyone. If any of my reports tend to be known issues that everybody is fully aware of, feel free to ignore them.
I agree that more testing is (always) desireable. Personally, I may be able to look into your new implementation(s) a bit sometimes later this week.
+Thomas -- Thomas Anders (thomas.anders at blue-cable.de) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
