[Sugar-devel] 90% working patches (was Re: 0.100 release schedule)
dwnarvaez at gmail.com
Wed Mar 27 19:04:49 EDT 2013
I don't think anything which increases testing and development is
necessarily good. It might do so and hurt the primary goals of the
I also think projects with too many features and too many bugs are not
very useful. Wether that happens at 10 minor bugs per feature or at
1000, I don't know, but it does happen.
On 27 March 2013 23:08, James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org> wrote:
> Without reference to the actual patch, adding one major feature and
> adding 10 minor bugs is still useful, because it increases testing and
> therefore development.
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 07:01:21PM -0300, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
>> It's true, but this comments are in the context of new features,
>> and specifically big features like the proposed Journal changes.
>> In this context, if we add 1 feature and 10 bugs, is not a good deal.
>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 6:53 PM, James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org> wrote:
>> I disagree. A 90% working patch should be reviewed or even accepted,
>> if it improves the situation more than it degrades the situation.
>> Don't let the good be the enemy of the perfect.
>> In particular, if the patch fixes a high priority ticket but opens
>> three low priority tickets, the project has still benefited.
>> Each patch mail can be considered a "release" of sorts. Releasing
>> early and often increases collaboration.
>> James Cameron
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> James Cameron
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
More information about the Sugar-devel