[ros-kernel] new patch

[Steven Edwards]

Hello Ge,

--- Ge van Geldorp <ge at gse.nl> wrote:
> 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.

Yes I see what you mean. 

> 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.

Sorry maybe I shouldnt have spoken up for the third vote. =( This patch
is not worth getting in to a big debate over but.......

I think your right. It exposes a flaw in our development process for
people with commit access. It is situations like this why I pushed
strongly for module owners in the CVS access discussion. The "get it to
work first, optimize later" does break down if you are the module owner
and you think there is a better way to do something. I discussed this
with Jon lastnight and told him that in the end it would be up to you
as Win32k/user32 is your baby. I still think this is the development
route we need to take long term. You own Win32k/User32, Eric owns the
disk subsystem and installer, Martin owns explorer, Vizzini owns
networking and etc owns etc...... With this method each module has its
own "god" that decides what is better and whats not with patches like
this.
 
Thanks
Steven


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree