DISCLAIMER: in this reply I don't say anything useful for the project.
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 8:09 AM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
My complaint is about the fact that what we had in mime4j was not different
from what we had in JAMES Server multiple times (in that case caused by
Robert) and I don't see why we should use similar tones/moods in a
collaborating environment.
the functional tests used in IMAP have proved very good at spotting
differences between JVMs. i run the tests and try hard not to commit
changes that break the build. i don't always succeed.
There's more serenity in people accepting *your* mistakes. I have to be
a very very bad boy :devil-grin:
On 23rd June 2008 I wrote a message to server-dev for failures in JAMES
Server trunk, no one even replied to it:
http://markmail.org/message/3ejhepq5w4yhuk7u
3 WEEKS later I tried again with 2 specific messages and more details:
http://markmail.org/message/5tmlhtut75txkdbk
http://markmail.org/message/whp335y3h5b53s2j
You was really fast (at least that's what I thought) and after few DAYS
I wrote "thank you" and I was very happy (just look at the last message
of each thread above).
I don't know how much time you lost because of my bad commit, I hope you
won't ask me a refund for the time you lost in this thread after the
test suite has been "fixed" ;-)
i understand that broken tests inconvenience other collaborators. this
is one reason why IMAP should really be moved into a separate library.
I work on some TDD project where we have many tests for code that does
not even have an implementation yet, so I don't think they are
inconvenient. But it's clear now that this team does not like them (to
be soft).
I would have simply liked (deja vu..) a standard discussion or a simple
request to change something to happen with a different tone and without
disappointment, but this place is so hostile that I'm getting used to
this. Luckily in my paid job I have to deal with very funny people!
It seems that MIME4J was working like a charm and the failing tests have
been removed in few hours (most of them in few minutes after someone asked
for this).
intentionally committing failing tests forces people to work on what
you want to work on rather than what they want to work on. these
failures were just in the DOM API and were not critical to either the
SAX or pull parsers.
It depends on how people works. I'm able to work on projects having
failures in tests. If tests are good and are unit-tests then the
remaining of the test suite is always enough to understand if you are
breaking more code or not.
To be fair I've always done everything to not have failing tests, and I
also prefer not having failures in this kind of projects. This specific
issue simply happened because an issue I thought could have been solved
in 5 minutes engaged a big discussion about who is stricter and who is
smarter. My bad I didn't revert it ASAP, but please note we are talking
of HOURS, not months, and it was fixed in MINUTES once the first complaint.
BTW I hope you also understand this is a matter of preference. It seems
that most of JAMES people around prefer your style, let's use it and
move over.
In fact I do too..... suprise!! :-)
http://markmail.org/message/d6yduudb3rkjkees
the reaction was predictable: lots of mail
activity whilst everything interested was brought up to speed. this
could have been avoided if the demonstration tests had not been
committed without fixes.
I don't think the whole newline thread (the big one) is there because of
the commit and we'll probably die disagreeing on this :-/
Instead the "[Mime4j] 24 Test Failures" thread is there because you used
words I didn't like (did I say I'm huffish?). It took few minutes to
solve this major issue.
We can continue forever on this thread, but please note that there are
no more failing tests. So the length of the useless thread does not
depend on the number of failing tests committed. ;-)
I saw at least 3 hands from active mime4j contributors raised asking
(explicitly or implicitly) to slow down (which is a majority) so I
propose to do exactly that.
[...]
pushing forward fast means that care needs to be taken to take the
community along. i think this is happening ok ATM.
Bernd says he recorded at least 3 contributors asking to slow down. Who
should I believe? ;-)
Stefano
PS: the title was "make love, not war", then "peace & love" but there
are not girls around, so you probably could have misunderstood me! ;-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
