"Carlos Averett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It's open source software
I'm well aware of this, thanks. > there can never be only one way to do things, even if one of them > works just fine. I don't remember saying there was. I was simply trying to ascertain what the user is trying to accomplish by posting a patch. Perhaps it was motivated by a perceived inadequacy in TMDA, in which case I might want to make some adjustments to TMDA. Everyone is entitled to make whatever changes they want to their copy of TMDA, maintain their own patches, etc, but this may not be the best way to go about things, for the user or for the software. Myself, I don't enjoy keeping my own set of patches that I have to apply and possibly adjust each and every time I upgrade to a new release of that software. Instead, I try and determine whether my changes can be integrated into the whole. Sometimes I find that what I was trying to accomplish is already available using existing capabilities, and my patch is not necessary. Sometimes I find that what I'm trying to accomplish is not currently possible, but the maintainer is agreeable to my patch, in which case everyone benefits. I no longer have to worry about maintaining custom code, and everyone else gains a new capability. Further, when that change is rolled into the whole, it can then benefit from the existing resources. Users can now use this mailing list for example to discuss the capability, and leverage the experience of other users who themselves use it. They may provide comments and code that improves or extends this capability, improving it for everyone. None of these benefits are available when operating in isolation. _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
