[MCP] Getting big refactorings accepted by harvesters
Daniel Vainsencher
danielv at netvision.net.il
Tue Mar 25 22:05:09 UTC 2003
First, add the [cd] tag - you've done the work (the changes are
documented), make it explicit.
The change set is big, but it's simple. It's really a very focused, very
specific refactoring throughout, so it's pretty easy to approve. In the
future, document this fact more clearly - the fact that it's so focused
should make me prefer this change to something more wide ranging, but it
won't if I have to read the code to understand it.
The change is described as:
***********
* refactor of #initialize methods
* added/implemented #defaultBounds, #defaultBorderColor,
#defaultBorderWidth and #defaultColor
* some small methods categorization
* remove of most direct asignation for color, bounds, borderColor and
borderWidth variables
***********
I would understand it much better like this -
***********
Enforce existing "template method" pattern for Morph>>initialize and
Morph>>basicInitialize.
Extend it to initialize bounds and border properties in addition to
color.
In the process, removes most direct accesses to the relevant variables,
setting the stage for protecting those variables completely.
***********
If you think its ready, send it to the list as a [FIX] (until we get
sqfixes to harvest automatically the [REFACTOR] flag), with the [cd][er]
flags. Since it seems simple and well documented to me, I'll give it
priority.
Daniel
German Morales <germanmorales at delta-sys.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It took me some time (I had little free lately), but finally I finished
> reviewing the first change set of MCP.
>
> http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3005
>
> The 0001 change set has 162Kb, so it definitely doesn't deserve the [sm] tag.
>
> As said in this list, such a big change set will have some resistance from
> the harvesters, so I wrote some notes while reviewing the change set:
>
> http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/uploads/3005/0001.txt
>
> I've wrote just OK when the refactoring is the expected one, and added
> some comments when the changes are not so obvious or something is wrong
> but is fixed in another change set.
>
> My questions are:
> -is this helpful?
> -is this enough?
> -what can I do to help this change set get harvested?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> German Morales
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|