1 |
On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 14:52 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:38:17 +0100 Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> | You still haven't posted posted a *single example* of webapp-config |
4 |
> | brokeness. You, I'd say you should either back up claims about "all |
5 |
> | the ways in which webapp-config is broken" or apologize to the |
6 |
> | concerned developers for false claims. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Fine. If posting a single way in which webapp-config is broken will |
9 |
> make you happy, here you go: |
10 |
> |
11 |
> From webapp.eclass: |
12 |
> |
13 |
> function webapp_read_config () |
14 |
> { |
15 |
> |
16 |
> This is a whitespace / coding style breakage. The correct format should |
17 |
> be: |
18 |
> |
19 |
> webapp_read_config() { |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Yes, it's an utterly trivial problem, but it is a QA violation. Getting |
22 |
> a complete list is something that takes a heck of a lot longer, and I |
23 |
> have yet to be convinced that my time would not be better spent |
24 |
> elsewhere. |
25 |
Wow. That is ... impressive. After about two days of asking for any real |
26 |
bugs you are able to show a trivial syntax issue? |
27 |
|
28 |
Please stop yelling "it si teh b0rk!" if you can't even list any serious |
29 |
issues, and stop being rude to other people. |
30 |
|
31 |
Thanks, |
32 |
Patrick |
33 |
-- |
34 |
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move |