Noel J. Bergman ha scritto:
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
I think it is a different story. That branch involved much less code than
current v2.3-trunk differences but included major changes to mailet api.
Yes, much less code. More code ==> more bugs. And you certainly aren't
going to claim that there aren't major changes in trunk from the known-good
code.
Let's start collecting bugs in JIRA and start solving some of them. We
keep talking about how unstable is trunk and how many bugs are in trunk,
but we don't have bugs reported against that code.
We are discussing too much about what it "could be" and we should use
our limited time to work on concrete things.
If we'll collect too many critical/problematic bugs against trunk we may
agree more easily that v2.3 is the way to go and that trunk should be
discarded, don't you think?
We need a proof that trunk is really unstable. I always remember that
working on 2.3 most bugs where in the old code and not in the new code,
so we cannot simply say that old code is stable/good and new code is not
stable good. E.g: we wrote unit tests for a lot of the new code, old
code is not unit tested.
The fact that you don't know what is in trunk because you had no time to
review most commits doesn't mean that this is the same for everyone else
here.
Actually, (a) you have no idea what I review, and (b) I will bet you that
almost no one is reviewing a fraction of the commits. That's part of our
dysfunction as a community. Out of Serge, Danny, myself, Vincenzo, Soren,
Steve, Norman, Robert, Bernd and anyone else whom I've missed, how many
pairs of eyes do you believe are reviewing each commit? My guess is 2-3,
tops, on average, including the committer.
(a) VERY TRUE. Tell us.
(b) VERY TRUE: this is true since JAMES project has been created. Or at
least is true since I'm here (2005).
We need to cut milestones and do releases if we want people to use that
code and increase our confidence on the code quality.
IMO there is no need at all to merge v2.3 and trunk this time.
I agree with you, but who suggested such a thing?
Good then. Recorded. No need to merge. (it was probably a
misunderstanding on my side.. )
This time we had no single fix in v2.3 that has not been done in trunk
too.
It isn't a matter of what is fixed in trunk. Hey, every appropriate fix
that went into MS-Windows XP went into MS-Windows Vista, too, but that
doesn't make MS-Windows Vista any less a diasterous load of digital garbage.
For that matter, I am currently testing Ubuntu 7.10 and 8.04. Guess what?
The new kernel in 8.04 (still Alpha) has major functional regressions
compared to 7.10. New code, new designs, new bugs.
During v2.3 development also happened the opposite thing: new code, new
design, old buggy code no more used ;-)
But again, this is theory: let's collect the bugs and let's see if we
have men-power to fix them or not.
If you exclude IMAP most code has changed BEFORE the code reorganization.
So it should be easier than you think. You will see that since dicember
2006
we had very limited changes in the sources (if you exclude IMAP and its
dependencies). It is a lot of code, because we implemented a lot of
features and fixed a lot of long standing issues in our services API.
So you propose that we first vet v2.3.0 against a pre-reorg revision of
trunk, and then compare the current trunk against the first post-reorg
revision?
--- Noel
I just suggested you a simpler way to work around the problem you
described (reorganization make it difficult to compare). I don't need
this check for myself.
Let us know what are your conclusions/ideas once you'll have checked the
code.
Thank you,
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
