| 1 |
On Sun, 15 May 2016 08:40:39 +0900 |
| 2 |
Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Saturday, May 14, 2016 9:54:11 AM JST Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > On Friday, May 13, 2016 4:52:09 PM JST Ian Delaney wrote: |
| 7 |
> > >> On Sat, 7 May 2016 23:25:58 +0200 |
| 8 |
> > >> |
| 9 |
> > >> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 10 |
> > >> > Do you seriously expect this code to work? How about testing? Or |
| 11 |
> > >> > reading diffs before committing? |
| 12 |
> > > |
| 13 |
> > > Absolutely nothing wrong was said here. Obviously the code was not tested |
| 14 |
> > > and Michal pointed that out very plainly. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > It is actually possible to communicate both plainly and politely at |
| 17 |
> > the same time. This does not require sacrificing any commitment to |
| 18 |
> > quality at all. Really the only downside is having more of an |
| 19 |
> > appearance of professionalism. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Please enlighten me as to what was impolite here? The strong language of |
| 22 |
> "seriously" or definitively stating that the individual did not perform the |
| 23 |
> necessary QA actions before committing? Both of which are completely called |
| 24 |
> for and appropriate. No vulgarity, insults, or demeaning words were used. |
| 25 |
> How would you have responded professionally? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I thought his response was pretty tame actually. If you break the tree |
| 28 |
because you couldn't be bothered to do the barest minimum of testing you |
| 29 |
absolutely deserve to be called out on it. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
But if you guys just want to hug it out that's cool too. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
Archives