On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 05:11, Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein_at_gmail.com]
>> Sent: woensdag 18 mei 2011 11:07
>> To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
>> Cc: Hyrum K Wright
>> Subject: RE: svn commit: r1104610 - in
>> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc: props.c wc_db.c wc_db.h
>> No, we said if somebody breaks the build, then it can be reverted.
>> Breaking the tests does not qualify. You were out of line. I just got
>> telling off people in Lucene-land for this. I also said that if it were up
>> to me, I would warn somebody about the anti social behavior once, and
>> their commit privs on the second time. It is THAT much of a problem in the
>> community dynamics.
>> Don't do that again.
> Does breaking all the property handling code qualify?
If you felt the changes were interfering with your work, then you can
always apply a reversion to your local working copy to continue your
work. Then, when Hyrum got back online, he could figure out what he
did and how to move it forward.
For most people, his changes may have had no impact at all.
> That was what happened...
> Not just a few random tests. There were dozens of tests broken, but the test
> suite itself was broken in a different way that didn't catch it.
> All the single property accesses were routed through the new depthy code,
> that was fundamentally flawed until I fixed it. (Which was impossible to
> find without reverting).
Yup. And you could have done that entirely locally. You could have
*worked with* Hyrum to get through this.
In short, your behavior was disrespectful and anti-social.
Received on 2011-05-18 11:16:40 CEST