Need to do something

Andreas Raab andreas.raab at gmx.de
Wed Oct 12 22:10:27 UTC 2005


All -

Since I got a few off-list notes, let me make a clarification about the 
chess game example:

Andreas Raab wrote:
> [*] As a matter of fact that is one of the main reason that stopped me 
> to do anything for this community - if people who have no idea of the 
> subject matter start "beautifying" my code so that it looks better to 
> their swollen eyes, then I'm out. I *know* when I'm using a pattern like 
> "foo == nil" instead of "foo ifNil:" and I expect you to respect my 
> preferences if I want to emphasize a particular aspect in the code. Just 
> looking over what people have done to my code in the chess game makes me 
> want to barf - not one person who has touched it has had any idea 
> whatsoever how the thing works; yet they feel utterly qualified to 
> rewrite and reformat code they don't even understand. Bah!

The point in the above is not about anyone's particular change but a 
generic expression of disgust about a process that actively destroys the 
necessary sense of ownership in code. Put simply, it means: If something 
is "my code" then "you" can't rewrite it over the top of my head. The 
owner of the code *has* to be involved in the process. If the owner 
isn't involved, then he/she/they no longer own that code. Meaning that 
the current and past harvesting process, where fixes get through despite 
  nobody who has any relation to the code in question is looking at the 
changes is actually making the situation worse, because any time you do 
this you destroy the sense of ownership a bit more[*].

The only reason I used the chess game as an example for this process is 
because I wrote it and because I noticed how the code changed over the 
years (without any guide or harvester *ever* talking to me).

[*] This is also what I mean when I talk about the current process 
competing with development in packages. The fact of the matter is that 
Stefane and Marcus actively destroy the sense of ownership in the 
packages by having their "private 3.9a versions" and happily making 
changes to those packages locally in the 3.9a repository. Sorry, this 
simply won't fly.

Cheers,
   - Andreas



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list