[ros-kernel] new patch
Ge van Geldorp
ge at gse.nl
Tue Nov 11 20:24:00 CET 2003
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Edwards
> Right. This is a hard case as the code does fix the problems
> pointed out. Its mainly a question of design and performance.
> The standard we have followed to date is get it to work first
> and optimize later.
I don't want to make a bigger issue out of this than it really
is, so I think this will be my last message on this item.
A few months ago, we had a situation where someone without CVS
access sent a patch to the list. The patch worked as submitted,
but the committer saw room for improvement and made a small
change to the patch before committing it. The original poster
didn't like this. There was something of a heated debate about
it and the end conclusion was that the committer shouldn't have
changed the patch and in fact the change was rolled back.
Atm we have the same situation. Jonathan submitted a patch which
works, no doubt about that. I think there is room for improvement,
so I talked to Jonathan about it. He thinks the patch is fine as
it is. Now the funny thing is if I commit it I can't optimize it
anymore, according to the rules established earlier, so the "get
it to work first, optimize later" doctrine breaks down.
> Still in this case I suggest commenting the hell out of the
> code so at point point down the road we can look at speeding
> things up.
It's not a matter of lack of time at this moment to change the
code to what I believe is "better". Hell, I think it would take
about 10 min (half an hour tops) to change it. The issue is that
Jonathan and I have a different view here of what is "better".
I respect the fact that he has a different view and I don't want
to enforce my opinion just because I have commit access and he
doesn't. Hence my request for a third vote.
The code is in (with Filip's fix) and the matter resolved as far
as I'm concerned.
Gé van Geldorp.
More information about the Ros-kernel