| 1 |
On Mon, 16 May 2016 10:05:33 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 16 May 2016 15:56:01 +0800 |
| 3 |
> Ian Delaney <idella4@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > As long as this persists and is not intervened to polish and tidy up, |
| 5 |
> > g-devs will persist in making innocent, naive or incompetent blunders |
| 6 |
> > and run the gauntlet of being publicly scolded over errata. I can only |
| 7 |
> > express my view that this style of personal demeaning potentially |
| 8 |
> > results in embarrassment, public humiliation and drives community |
| 9 |
> > members away from participation. The ultimate negative influence. I |
| 10 |
> > would never entertain taking on eclass writing with the incumbent qa |
| 11 |
> > member delivering assessments under the title of 'code review' in the |
| 12 |
> > style he does. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> If you're writing the kind of code that results in you being subjected |
| 15 |
> to scathing criticism for breaking metadata generation for the entire |
| 16 |
> tree, then discouraging you from contributing can only be good for the |
| 17 |
> distribution... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Everyone can and will make mistakes, this is normal. Only those who |
| 20 |
do nothing make no mistakes. I see no reason why developer should |
| 21 |
be discouraged from contributing for a single blunder. Of course, |
| 22 |
if blunder rate is too high, comrel should take an action; but this |
| 23 |
is not the case here. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Best regards, |
| 28 |
Andrew Savchenko |
Archives