[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Make define-builtin-markup{, -list}-command #:category #:properties

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Make define-builtin-markup{, -list}-command #:category #:properties keywords (issue160048)
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 22:47:58 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux)

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 09:57:39PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>> > Yes, Carl made a mistake.  That's unfortunate, but he's human.
>> So what do you think I am?
> I think you're a human.
>> > If anything, this incident should show that jumping through hoops
>> > is even *more* important, not less.
>> If Carl had adhered to the standards demanded from me, there would
>> have been a review of his code and I could have suggested an
>> improvement.
> Yes.

Actually no, since I had not noticed nor followed the discussion about
the code.  So I've been fuming more than called for about double
standards in this case.

> His mistake wasn't the bad code -- I mean, yes, that was wrong,
> but I don't consider code mistakes to be *mistakes*.  His mistake
> was short-circuiting the review process for this patch.

There are patches that are "obviously right" and a direct improvement.
If I had been in his place, I'd likely have committed a fix as well.
I'd likely have used "make && make doc" before doing so, but I doubt I
would have waited for a review to come in.

In my book, the main mistake was not checking the patch to compile.
That messes up git bisect for finding problems as I have been told

David Kastrup

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]