=- James Cameron wrote on Tue 26.Feb'08 at 10:23:15 +1100 -=

> > Exactly, that's why I ask in advance, to avoid fighting and/ or
> > wasting time by hacking unfamiliar code.
> > I rather spend the little time I can afford on things I can handle
> > or learn just enough to make a problem go away, not all the code.
> On the other hand, once you have invested the time in learning the
> code, you will be able to argue more soundly and successfully. The
> only expert status I have comes from understanding or writing the
> code. Even Bill gets patches accepted, once he understands the
> code.

So did I. I didn't suggest the change out of thin air.
Based on what I know I wanted another opinion on whether that's the
right direction to go.
I guess neither of you studied each and every single line of the
whole code, but what matters to a problem at hand.
Otherwise you are more expert.

> The trouble I have is that I don't know exactly what you are
> proposing, because it hasn't hit my mental model of the current
> situation. My mental model is integrated with the source code.

I gave you source code.

> > Future == intention/ reasons.
> That's an interesting viewpoint. I didn't see a contradiction.

Fine, enlighten me then what you mean with "I'm more interested
in {...} the future".

> > > It would give the information I need to apply the patch.
> > 
> > You can't replace 1 single line of code (by copy&paste)?
> > 
> > > I will take a patch if I understand it and agree with it.
> > 
> > So, what's the problem understanding with 1 instruction replaced
> > by another and its location?
> Can't you use diff(1) yet? It isn't difficult. darcs even makes it
> easier ... "darcs diff > proposed.patch"

I can, but it takes more time to do that for such a simple patch.
(no darcs here)

> Let me tell you what happens if you send a patch ...
> 1. my mail reader flags it as a patch and places it ahead of every
> other mail I've got to read,

If you like it that way, fine.

> 2.
> 3.
> 4.
> 5.
> 6.
> 7.

Awesome overhead for specialized automation to give you a convenient
life. My observation of robot-like acting isn't too far off.
I'm sorry for being just an average human trying to talk to another
average human.
Maybe there are still some humans left who care enough.

> 8. a decision is made on whether to accept the patch as is,
> augment it, or reject it,
> 9. the patch from you and any review patch from me are then pushed
> to the external repository for others to use.

So de-facto you lead the crowd, just reject any official
responsibility to go all the way.

© Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal!
EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude.
You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give.