On 5/30/06, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, I think this explain why I think that this is not a best practice. Most James discussions takes weeks and are lost forever with no results.
This thread has gotten somewhat bitter. My 2 cents... I voted for Stefano as a committer and trust him to fix what he breaks. discuss his changes, and scratch his itches. I guess I already said this, but there's a lack of trust among the group about whether they think people will fix problems or will get things done in time or something... I'm not completely clear what Stefano is doing wrong: - proposed fetchmail refactoring using review-then-commit approach... I almost think his changes could have been commit-then-review, but appreciate the way he shared the work in progress. - fixed our stupid build process that we've been meaning to do for forever to not bundle ancient ant anymore. - helped develop a fresh impl of spf and brought it into SVN. I understand people wanting Stefano to share more what he's working on and changing, but the way things are getting said are unlikely to create the desired result. -- Serge Knystautas Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
