[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Malformed interactive spec in replace.el

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Malformed interactive spec in replace.el
Date: 06 Jul 2004 11:26:41 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50

Juanma Barranquero <address@hidden> writes:

> On 06 Jul 2004 10:35:45 +0200
> David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> > That's a result of the recent disruptive changes of Stefan that were
> > seemingly checked in without discussion.
> I don't know about "disruptive changes".  I think in this case the
> problem is something trivial, like a missing `progn'.
> > Could we restrict ourselves to changes that conceivably work towards
> > getting into a consistent state for the release?
> This is an experiment: we're now trying to see whether we can "restrict
> ourselves" into working to get a release out.

And the way to do that is checking in completely new functionality
that changes existing APIs, replaces existing functionality by
something different without apparent need or discussion, and needs
additional work to get it documented, tried out, compared to the
behavior it replaces, and even just to work?

It is my opinion that such changes should at the very least be only
attempted if there is some consensus that they are unambiguously
desirable for the next release.  Our policy is feature freeze right
now.  "Policy" does not mean that exceptions are impossible, but then
we should have some consensus about them.

> Perhaps we can (and more power to us), and perhaps we cannot, and
> then, other models (like branching for a release and leaving the
> trunk open for people who wants to do new stuff) would be better.

So you claim this is just Stefan's way of suggesting he thinks we
should not concentrate on the release?

> It's a matter of group dynamics, and much, I think, depends on the
> size and cohesion of the group.
> But in any case I see no point in getting angry about the outcome :)

I fail to see those changes as an "outcome" to an "experiment" trying
to see whether we can "restrict outselves into working to get a
release out".

It's like eating a cake as an experiment for checking whether one can
keep one's diet.

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

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