[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to")
From: |
Aaron Bentley |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to") |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:38:05 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040309) |
Tom Lord wrote:
Those both require project-specific rules to be followed. `submit'
especially just cries out for something turing complete. Other
examples are not hard to construct.
Rules written in a turing-complete language can be resistant to
automated analysis and modification. To find out what they do, one has
to do them.
I mention this because I'm contemplating automating inventory
configuration in pyaba, and the notion of modifying the regexes is
rather daunting. I can only imagine how much more difficult it would be
if instead of regexes, =tagging-method was written in a Real Programming
Language.
isn't that part of the beauty of a non-corporate (or
enlightened-corporate) project? That the maintainer can thrash the
short-term schedule in a way that maximizes efficiency of production
rather than trashing the quality of the project in order to hit some
arbitrary and fairly meaningless deadlines, and thus help to
_protect_the_quality_ of the project?
Perhaps that is an advantage, but I don't believe you've done that,
because your merge rate affects the development rates of other
developers. My work on tla has slowed quite considerably. It's also
has a negative effect on my morale.
I don't want to get too far ahead of you, because that would mean that
my later changes would depend on earlier, unapproved changes, which you
might yet veto. And I don't want to spend the energy developing patches
if they'll never get merged.
I know we all have our favorite pending issues but, the truth is, the
last releases are quite fine, warts and all.
I do find it strange that the latest official releases still have a
security hole, despite James patching it back in April. I think it's a
shame that official releases of tla will commit .id files that don't
correspond to any source file.
I think there's a difference between bugfixes and features (though my
boss sometimes forgets). Off the top of my head, there are three things
to do with a bugfix:
1. accept it
2. reject it
3. request changes
All three actions provide useful feedback to those working on Arch, and
there's no great benefit to delaying them while contemplating future
directions.
> The next steps include
> some big ones. I've been feeling a need to think through some of
> where we are going before making the problem more complicated by
> merging lots of new stuff in.
Features are something else entirely, and I think you're well justified
in taking your time with them. Unlike bugfixes, new features can
involve structural changes, and it's important not to compromise the
structure of the system or hamstring future development when adding them.
The story you quoted actually reminds me of another quote:
"Get a shot off FAST. This upsets him long enough to let you make your
second shot perfect." -- Robert A. Heinlein
In the story, Kim shoots first, without even using a gun. Keeping the
initiative means Kim keeps control of the situation, even with a first
shot that's *far* from perfect.
Aaron
--
Aaron Bentley
Director of Technology
Panometrics, Inc.
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Pierce T.Wetter III, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Tom Lord, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Pierce T.Wetter III, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Charles Duffy, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Pierce T.Wetter III, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Charles Duffy, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Matthew Dempsky, 2004/06/30
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Miles Bader, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Andrew Suffield, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Matthew Dempsky, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"),
Aaron Bentley <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Tom Lord, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), James Blackwell, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Charles Duffy, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Tom Lord, 2004/06/30
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Miles Bader, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Tom Lord, 2004/06/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to"), Tom Lord, 2004/06/30