[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Reworking the GTK+ cdebconf frontend

On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 03:35:09PM +0200, Attilio Fiandrotti wrote:
> I must evantually say i'm disappointed of the way the gtk frontend code 
> was nonchalantly modified, without any patch being posted and discussed 
> on d-boot previously, moreover proving to ignore many design decisions 
> behind the whole g-i.
> Because of all the above reasons, i'd like to revert the gtk frontend to 
> r47287 ASAP.

My initial plan was to work on the code alone until I would be satisfied
with it and then only to submit it for inclusion.

Colin told me that it would be better if I would rather do more
incremental changes that could be more easily reviewed.  I then followed
his advice and started to commit incremental changes in the repository.

What I have done yet is only a first step in a process.  I basically
wanted to have a better view on the code to be able to refactor it.
It's currently underdocumented, so I wanted to get things clearer in the
first place.  This meant expanding variable definitions and adding a lot
of comments all over the code.  And yes, this made the code longer, but
that's only a first step to be sure that I would not loose any
subtitlities during the refactoring step.

I felt a general consensus here, in Edinburgh, from most people involved
in the debian-installer, that such improvement of the code base would be
more than welcome.  I also felt that they were trusting my intents and
my abilities to improve the code.

I know how much time you have actually spent on that code, and I fully
appreciate it.  If you don't trust me, well...  I might just go on with
my initial idea and submit a huge diff at the end.

In any case, please give me more time before rejecting my contributions
straight away.

Jérémy Bobbio                        .''`. 
lunar@debian.org                    : :Ⓐ  :  # apt-get install anarchism
                                    `. `'` 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: