[Mono-dev] revert of r104029/30/31

Sebastien Pouliot sebastien.pouliot at gmail.com
Mon May 26 07:45:26 EDT 2008

Hello Andreas,

On Mon, 2008-05-26 at 12:20 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 26.05.2008 um 11:23 schrieb Atsushi Eno:
> > Changing parameter names may result in bugs (especially when
> > there is a field that has the identical name). When it is mixed
> > with line ending changes, it becomes very hard to identify the
> > cause of the issue. Those changes should be done separately.
> I was told so too, but Andreas N. was recently flamed for doing a  
> separate typo fix commit.
> And review for such non-functional patches, while trivial and non- 
> breaking, appears to be handled with very low priority...

Yes and I fail to see why non-functional, trivial patches should have
nothing else than low priority. Unless I missed a memo where they became
more important than bugs filled in bugzilla ? ;-) I often heard people
asking when X or Y feature will become available (if ever) but it's
quite rare to heard about someone (other that the author) asking for
such (non-functional & trivial) patches to be applied.

Also I totally disagree with your *non-breaking* part since experience
just told us (and not for the first time) that:

* Any patch, even trivial, can break things. The bigger the patch the
most likely it will.

* People do *NOT* test their trivial patches (and yes I have committed
this sin myself so this is not targeted to anyone in specific).


More information about the Mono-devel-list mailing list