[Sugar-devel] RFC: Kill the delayed menus for good

[Tomeu Vizoso]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 03:40, Bernie Innocenti <bernie at codewiz.org> wrote:
> El Mon, 12-10-2009 a las 22:36 -0400, Bernie Innocenti escribió:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Michael just passed by the Acetarium and, since the dinner was late, we
>> found the time to test and review his latest prototype^W patch.
>>
>> I'm loving how the menus suddenly are now snappy and responsive. Please,
>> test it yourself and report back. If we like this change, I think we
>> should go on and also kill the code that this patch makes redundant.
>> (please, let's not add another configurable knob!)
>
> BTW, Michael and I have a "small disagreement" on how a maintainer
> should react to the present patch. From a purely functional PoV, this
> patch is short, correct and low impact. Yeah, but... who's ever going to
> clean up after it if we do not demand the cleanup to be merged
> atomically with the patch that opens the need for it? Once the patch is
> in, the maintainer would no longer have a stick to brandish while saying
> "now eat your veggies!".
>
> (Michael replies: "This is a flawed position because it leads to absurd
> conclusions. More specifically, it actively discourages the current
> contributor from submitting more patches by denying the satisfaction of
> seeing their existing patch merged, delays the deferral of a correct and
> believable patch that introduces behavior you yourself describe as
> 'desirable' and, last but not least, misses an opportunity to involve
> inexperienced contributors by providing appropriate "on-ramp" bugs like
> the proposed refactoring.)

I'm more concerned about developers proposing big user experience
changes because they feel it's better. Before I look at the patch I
would like to know if there's agreement from people close to our users
that this behavior change is desired. How can we get that?

Thanks,

Tomeu

-- 
«Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar.
What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David
Farning