[slime-devel] Re: cvs committed darcs changes

[Nikodemus Siivola]

"Attila Lendvai" <attila.lendvai at gmail.com> writes:

> when the issue gets over a certain annoyance limit). writing the
> changelog, fighting with cvs and writing these long mails take more
> time then the changes themselves. please don't take it as an offense

Writing the ChangeLog cannot take any longer then writing the
corresponding summary as a Darcs record message, and if you don't
write a summation, other people cannot easily follow what is going on.

After that, it is just a question of doing 

 cvs ci -m "really short title for this stuff".

I cannot believe either of these are the issue, really.

If the question of destabilizing Slime with these quick fixes becomes
an issue, we can recommend FAIRLY_STABLE for most users again.

So that isn't a problem either.

Emails can take time, true.

> but my primary goal is to make slime a better tool which is less
> entangling in the day work, not to agree with numerous slime hackers
> with numerous different goals.

I think this is the real issue here. Everything else is a distraction.

I realize you may be near the end of your patience, but think about
this: in the long run, either you play the game the way other Slimers
do, or you end up maintaining a fork. If that's what you want to do,
fair enough.

Your time is not any less scarce then ours, I too have better things
to do then writing these long emails. This email too has already taken
more time then the INSPECT-IN-EMACS patch. Despite this I'm
proofreading it again now, because I know that _your_ time is not less
valuable then mine. I'm trying to save everybody's time by doing that,
and I rather hope others do the same.

We'd all prefer if things just went smoothly with hacking and there'd
be less need to hash things over like this.

> i can't fix people's isp connections, i can't read docs for them

This is totally beside the point. No-one has asked for any of these
things. Let's _please_ keep this on topic and to the point.

> can't (and shouldn't) decide on the fate of a several years old
> project with 20 patches behind me. i think there's nothing more i

Of course not. 

You asked for the commit bit, and (finally) you got it. Practically 
speaking, this means that while you get to do exactly what you will,
you are also responsible for your actions.

If something you commit draws heat, that's the way life works. 

Nothing strange or damning about it either way.

>> Slime doesn't need hundreds of customization variables.  What we need
>> are good defaults.
>
> had i committed the change that highlights the entire sexp i would
> have gotten mails from 10 other people yelling at me why did i commit
> this disgusting change...

This is another distraction. 

I say it's better to commit a change plus whatever customization
variables it needs, and wrangle over it later. The correct amount of
customization is to a degree a matter of taste.

 - Someone commits a new feature.
 - Time passes...
 - Someone removes the feature as a part of a cleanup.
 - Argument ensues.
 - A solution is arrived at.

This is the way things work. Of course one can talk about it before
removing some feature, but:

 willingness to talk things out when disagreement arises is essential.

Anyone who is not willing to do that is going to run into a wall
sooner or later -- with Slime or otherwise.

...

Frankly, if it settles down the dust, I'd be willing to move Slime to
Darcs + monthly timeboxed releases. I'm not willing to move Slime to
Darcs and retain current "release practise", though -- Darcs is still
esoteric enough to make that a bad proposition in my mind.

Cheers,

  -- Nikodemus              Schemer: "Buddha is small, clean, and serious."
                   Lispnik: "Buddha is big, has hairy armpits, and laughs."