[ haven't seen that yet because I wasn't CCed ]
Kamesh Jayachandran wrote on Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 20:12:43 +0530:
> On 03/02/2011 07:47 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >Bert Huijben wrote on Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:14:24 +0100:
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: Arwin Arni [mailto:arwin_at_collab.net]
> >>>Please review this and share your thoughts.
> >>I don't think this is the way we should implement this.
> >Which is precisely why one should contact the mailing list BEFORE
> >writing a patch. Especially a large/long patch such as this one.
> Let me share *my* concern here in proposing a idea to any *new* community.
> I would be happy to propose an idea where I lack direction and have
> a ambiguity in implementation.
> I would be happy to post a patch if idea is simpler enough which is
> the case here.
> Yes one can declare in advance what they wish to work on, But this
> declaration has a negative side effect of stigma if the idea is not
> complete in implementation especially this stigma is too much for a
Yep. I've been a newcomer once and I remember the feeling you're
But on the other hand: showing up with a patch that's larger (in line
count and byte count) than many feature branches is a Don't Do That.
Practically? If one wants to look into a problem, but isn't ready for
the commitment of emailing dev@ yet... I suppose the solutions fall
into three categories: email dev@ (but without stating "I promise to
write a patch"), email #svn-dev, email a committer.
> As a newcomer I would post a working patch than start a
> discussion(of course only if the idea is straightforward) which is
> often open-ended and confuses/discourages the new-comer if he is
> *not* that serious about the feature he proposes.
That's a separate problem --- patch reviews shouldn't scare off the
> With regards
> Kamesh Jayachandran
Received on 2011-03-08 01:25:46 CET