Re: [Nmh-workers] Refactoring the nmh source

[Josh Bressers]

> Joel Reicher wrote:
> >I'd like to start refactoring the code. I've had a look around, and much
> >of it is a little messy.
> 
> >I have three questions for the list. Firstly, are there any objections to
> >the basic idea of doing this?
> 
> It sounds like a good idea to me.

I've been trying to work on this bit by bit.  Some things have come up as
of late which have stopped me though (temporarily).  This source is in dire
need of love.

> 
> >Lastly, what's the policy with commits and ChangeLog? I'd prefer to do
> >frequent and small commits, but that may annoy some people. I also wouldn't
> >put most of what I'm planning to do into the ChangeLog.
> 
> I agree with small commits, but am less sure about the ChangeLog. At the
> moment ChangeLog seems to be a record of just about everything that's done
> to the code, large or small, so I think refactorings ought to get mentioned.
> (It seems to mostly duplicate CVS log comments, which makes me wonder if
> it shouldn't be autogenerated.) Perhaps we should have a different document
> that only describes the changes significant to users -- bugs fixed, new
> functionality added, etc ?

Now that there is a functioning CVS commits list, I question how important
this is.  I admit it is nice to have it in one place, but I also believe
we're diluting its value by putting every single modification in it.
Hopefully in the future savannah will support subversion, which has atomic
commits and makes finding diffs a very simple task.

As for annoying people, I wouldn't worry about that.  If it's a positive
thing for the project I don't see how anyone will have a legitimate
complaint.  There is a saying I heard once "If nobody is complaining about
you, you're not doing anything worthwhile."

-- 
    JB