open process issues (was: Roadmap proposal for 3.10/4.0)
denker at iam.unibe.ch
Tue Oct 17 21:43:46 UTC 2006
> For small changes, we still seem to be operating in a vacuum. I am
> unmotivated to fix bugs in core Squeak and in the Unix port, because
> in both cases the fixes are often ignored. SharedQueue, one of our
> fundamental synchronization constructs, has been broken for over a
> year now, despite a fix being available . Should I ever again blow
> away a Saturday like that? Nobody likes being a sucker who fights
> harder for something than its own management.
I added this improved SharedQueue as SharedQueue2 to 3.9 very early:
| MarcusDenker 10-07-05 18:09 in 3.9 for further testing
Sadly, nobody tested it. The next entry on mantis is yours from end
(we where past gamma then, so we can't do this change):
| lexspoon 09-28-06 10:47
| It has been a year, now, and no problems have come to light. We
should start migrating to this.
| All it requires is replacing SharedQueue by SharedQueue2.
So I don't see how it is my fault to not have added this: It is a
grave change, breaking
the image on that level is far from fun, so this is not a fix to be
added and then tested
("let's see if it works"). It needs at least some testing by someone
If somebody would have tested it, I would have added it to 3.9a.
Even your note, if you would have posted that half a year earlier,
would be in 3.9. Or you could have written a mail. *something*.
What I think as strange is that people critize so hard for the
percived fact that
there was a bottleneck in getting things accepted in 3.9. I don't
think that there
was a too big one, compared to earlier release cycles. There was a
in reviewing and testing. And with that, everybody could have helped.
In 3.9a, we managed to get mantis down to 275 entries, closing over 800.
That's *a lot*. And two month ago, I would have bet that if people
the negative aspects of 3.9a, they would have said something like a)
"this guy adds
every crap", not "b) there is a bottleneck, nothing got accepted".
And I am actually even
now convenced that a) actually is kind of more true than b).
More information about the Squeak-dev