[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:36:21 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 10:31:20PM -0500, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
Andrea,
Thanks for the patch. Could you attach it to an issue at
<http://twistedmatrix.com/bugs/>? Also, patches with unit tests are
likely
to be applied more quickly than those without.
My test suite is the CPUShare server code, I tested it.
James put this pretty well: if you fixed it this one time, how do we
know that this won't just be reverted and broken again by some other
patch? We have tests for a reason. We're not going to run CPUShare
every time to make sure that it didn't break again.
I hope I can be applied right away without special requirements
This is not a special requirement. All patches are required to come
with unit tests - JP's response is repeated so often, it was probably
just some text he keeps in his clipboard whenever he is reading
email. You are asking for special consideration which, I might add,
is more likely to be afforded to those who have a good track-record of
writing tests and filing bugs. You've contributed patches, but always
free-form on the mailing list with little explanation and no tests -
in some cases, that's more work to figure out than fixing the bug myself.
Or at least I've not nearly the time to write testsuites
for such trivial fixes,
Maybe if you did, my kernel wouldn't crash once a week... :)
nor to attach them somewhere with a web browser, sorry.
Yet, you spent *all this time* in your email client. How is that
easier? This message contained 5x as much text as would have been
required in the bug report, probably more than would have been in the
test and the report combined.
I hoped I could contribute despite significant constraints, I'm
You are not special. We are *all* operating under significant time
constraints for working on Twisted.
sorry if that's not the case. I think development of twisted is too
slow if it requires these formalities (especially given this is a web2
_unstable_ branch, I didn't touch anything else in my patch).
At this point, and I realize this may not be intentional, you are
actually contributing negatively. The "formalities" are in place to
speed up the development process. Without tests, we'd be spending
twice or three times as much time reviewing every patch, and preparing
for a release would require acceptance testing from dozens or hundreds
of people.
So I'm going to fork twisted into a private twisted-CPUShare branch for
my own server use where I won't have to waste time to fix bugs and, I'll
keep merging stuff from trunk as long as it makes sense.
You remember that 'epsilon' thing you objected to? That is
effectively Divmod doing exactly this. It's a great idea. Please do it!
This is only a great idea since patches tend to rot in the bugtracker.
I've added a patch for sending new style classes via pb at the end of 2003.
10 months later this has been assigned, in march 2005 db3l asks why this
patch hasn't been applied (he's using it successfully).
In April things start to fly: tests are being written, code is committed
(not my simple 3 line diff, something else).
However, my test program still doesn't work. In the end it's fixed
[http://twistedmatrix.com/bugs/issue426]
So, maybe you should check your "formalities" that speed up the
development process. I guess they aren't working that good.
It doesn't make sense for everyone to manage their own patched twisted,
fixing the same bugs...
- Ralf
_______________________________________________
Twisted-web mailing list
[email protected]
http://twistedmatrix.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twisted-web
