[Sugar-devel] RFC: Kill the delayed menus for good
michael at laptop.org
Thu Oct 15 10:59:56 EDT 2009
> If you insist on thinking that I have something against you, then I
> will stop having this discussion with you.
I insist only on the reasonableness of taking you literally at your word.
Naturally, I'm quite certain that you have nothing against me that you
don't also have against anyone else who is as damn persnickety as I
except when you write otherwise.
> I'm really tired of you continuously bringing this as a problem but not
> hearing anyone else caring about your troubles contributing.
1. It makes sense that you're tired of hearing about it; I'm tired of
it being a problem.
2. The phrase "but not hearing anyone else caring..." confuses me. I
can't tell whether you mean that I'm deaf to other people caring,
that no one else cares, or both. Both cases seem implausible to me,
but evidence is always welcome.
3. My troubles contributing are adequately controlled for by avoiding
sending actual patches. You saw this one only because Bernie said
that he liked the effect when I showed it to him and because I told
him that if he liked it, then he should recommend that others try it.
(Actually, you might have seen it earlier when I mentioned it to
you in IRC a few weeks ago, but I can easily understand how a
single line of IRC traffic is easy to miss.)
> I stand by what I said: substantial user experience changes will be
> considered only after discussion involving the design and deployment
> teams (which we are having now). This is not just for you but for
> anybody else that proposes patches for the modules that I maintain.
I understand but continue to question the usefulness of the decision
given its obvious overhead and consequences. Enjoy the fruits of your
> Try going to a GNOME or KDE module and proposing that they accept such
> a patch so people can test it, they are going to laugh at your face.
Sugar is not GNOME or KDE (nor the kernel, where experience demonstrates
that the pattern you refer to is actually fairly common). Consequently,
we should find out what's right for Sugar. There's nothing wrong with
you having one position which is different from mine.
> Maintenance is already a hard enough task, if the community thinks
> that a maintainer should also be accepting all patches, releasing
> them, packaging them, making soas spins, asking for feedback,
> reverting them, etc. Then I will be glad to pass maintenance to
> whoever is available to do these kinds of things.
If you find such a person, then please consider it -- I think Sugar
would benefit greatly from having a maintainership community with the
resources to do those things in that order, as I suggested in more
detail in the remaining part of my last email to which you didn't reply.
More information about the Sugar-devel