> It's just very tiring when one's efforts are ignored for weeks and
> the general impression is that new
> developers are something the project doesn't give a tuppeny-cuss
> about…

You know, it's still volunteer work. The time has to come from

> In addition to that, I also believe that Jürg's decision not to merge
> the patch is misguided. If clear and

That's probably driven by the history of people yelling at him for
breaking vala-based projects again.

> obvious bugs like that (short summary: the compiler accepts code such
> as List<int> l = new ArrayList<string>())
> are retained because of broken third-party projects (shotwell was
> mentioned), then it's impossible to move
> things forward. And guess what: open source developers do what they
> do because they do want to move things 
> forward. And if they can't do it in vala, they'll soon find some
> other, more welcoming project. And while
> I understand the importance of backwards compatibility, I don't think
> it's as important for vala as it is for,
> say, the kernel. Unlike the kernel, one machine can easily run two
> different versions of the compiler 
> simultaneously, and if the shotwell people want to compile old,
> broken code, I think it's entirely reasonable
> to expect them to keep an old, broken compiler version around to do
> so. Of course, the far more likely case is
> that they, like basically anyone else, actually *want* the compiler
> to tell them about their broken code so they
> can fix it! Not to mention all the other user who'd like to have this
> fix…

Or, you know, maybe you could just talk to "the shotwell people"
instead of making assumptions - I had no idea about this until
accidentally reading this thread.

vala-list mailing list

Reply via email to