[darcs-users] [darcs-devel] [issue885] get --to-match 'hash' => _darcs/tentative_pristine: openBinaryFile: does not exist (2.0.0 Regression)

[Petr Rockai]

Hi.

"David Roundy" <daveroundy at gmail.com> writes:
> Petr, if your code is going  to work around bugs rather than fixing
> them, yes, I will ask you to rewrite it.  I gave you a simple way to
> tell when this is happening, and now you're going to leave in a huff?
> If you don't care about the quality and maintainability of darcs'
> code, then we're better off without you.  If you do care about darcs'
> quality, you should learn to accept feedback to improve your code.

> Darcs is a huge code written by many people, which no one fully
> understands, and learning to work on darcs takes time and patience.
> And I don't have the time for patient hand-holding.
I suppose this still does deserve a reply. We aren't on the bestest of terms
right now I understand, but I would still like to resolve this for the
better. To make things a little clearer, no, I am not leaving in a huff. I am
merely declaring issue885 a lost cause. There is a lengthy IRC transcript of me
explaining to Jason what problems surround the code in question. I won't repeat
that, since neither of us has time to deal with it.

I find it somewhat distrustful of you to reject the patch without further
understanding of what's wrong with possibly better fixes. But I suppose that's
right, if your intention is to minimise changes to the codebase. I have tried
to keep the disruption to minimum while fixing the issue and staying reasonably
safe of introducing regressions. Note that I have no idea about the testsuite
coverage or other safety measures, so I do have to stay clear of wilder changes
(that's partly because HPC is currently broken on 6.8.2 and I don't quite have
the time available to get a rolling 6.8.3 build right now).

The bug in itself is not *worth* nearly as much time as I believe a proper fix
would require. It's marked urgent in the tracker (possibly because it's a
regression), that's where my intent to fix that comes from.

I hope I have made all this sufficiently clear and that the terms can be a
little friendlier now. (I won't deny that I have been offended by the initial
reaction, though. I am not surprised if you were offended by my
counter-reaction. I hope things are clearer and we can forget the
issue.

Well, I suspect there will be some more friction, as I am likely to push darcs
in directions you may disprove of. Nevertheless, I hope we can get by on rather
friendly terms. No point in making it any more bitter for either of us (or
anyone else) than it already is. I will now patiently wait for things to come.)

Thank you for your understanding.

Yours,
   Petr.

-- 
Peter Rockai | me()mornfall!net | prockai()redhat!com
 http://blog.mornfall.net | http://web.mornfall.net

"In My Egotistical Opinion, most people's C programs should be
 indented six feet downward and covered with dirt."
     -- Blair P. Houghton on the subject of C program indentation