2011/2/1 Marcus Denker <[email protected]>: > > On Feb 1, 2011, at 7:04 AM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> Nicolas >> >> We wanted to see the diff like in squeak (check the mails in september) but >> the squeaksource server would die under the >> diff size to generate (sic lukas). So? Do you think that we are explicitly >> against squeak. If we ever reached this state of mind, this is >> years that we passed it. >> >>> Maybe it's because the process only have appearances of quality, but >>> doesn't really pay off. >> >> Why do you say that? We log all our bugs and actions. So you can take all >> the fixes for squeak if you want. This is not my goal in life. >> Now we are more busy than average and sometimes opening a bug entry when you >> already pushed the code in the server >> is subject to missing some parts. But this is life. > > > Another aspect: Every 100% regid requirement kills a process. We tried that > in Squeak in the past. E.g. at one point, people > said we should *require* tests and a code review before adding a fix. Result: > complete standstill. Yes, these things are *nice* > and they should be done more often, but as soon as you require them, nothing > will happen. > > The same with deprecation: Yes, we want to provide deprecation for one > release for easy migration. But this in turn can not > be a law. There is so much cruft and so little structure (API vs. internal > methods undefined), that one can not move if a strict > rule is adopted. > > Strict rules kills human processes. > > Marcus >
I can only agree with this, the spirit of the rule matters, the letters don't. If the burden become inhuman, change the rules. Nicolas > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > >
