On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Geoffrey Garen <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Yes, this way of doing things has more overhead for you personally but > > saves overhead for everyone else in the project. > > I don't think it's fair to frame my perspective as "me personally" and your > perspective as "everyone else in the project." > I don't think that's a valid interpretation of the above sentence. It seems to simply be saying "there is a cost to the patch creator of running the patch past the bots, and there is a cost to the developer community at large if the tree is broken", which is undeniably true. If you'll permit me to editorialize, my guess is that some Google employees > prefer a rigid green tree policy because it matches their internal > development process, and it makes integrating with that process and > committing patches for other Google employees easier. > As a Google employee I am puzzled as to how a green tree policy "makes integrating with the process and committing patches for other Google employees easier". You seem to be suggesting that familiarity/similarity to another policy is some sort of benefit. I can't see how that's true, nor have I ever heard a Google employee suggest such. For the people who would prefer a green tree policy, I suspect the rationale is that they believe it lowers overall development costs, irrespective of what other policies on other projects may be, which clearly you do not agree with. PK
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
