I literally spent weeks developing and refining and doing
usability-testing of the filtering function before presenting it to
the community **five years** ago.  Now someone came along in one
afternoon this week and deleted features that were purposefully
designed that way.  They also fundamentally changed the way list
widgets respond to keyboard input since Squeak 3.x more than a decade
ago!

The date of the methods of these breakages matches the date of the
commit.  Here is what our development process says about this:

     * Exercise caution. This is a running system and breaking it
needlessly is generally frowned upon.
     * Restrain yourself. Getting developer access doesn’t mean you
are free to put in every pet extension you always wanted to have
without discussion.
      * If in doubt, ask. This is the corollary to the restrain
yourself rule. You’re not under pressure to ship a product, so you
have the time to send a note saying “hey, I’m planning to fix this old
issue and it may have some side effect here or there. Anyone having a
problem with that?”

I don't think someone who causes such a fundamental breakage with no
discussion should be offended when someone fixes it with no
discussion.  They should just acknowledge their commit was premature
like when the situation was reversed earlier this year when they
needed to revert my code:

     http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-Morphic-cmm-1074-mcz-td4877176.html#a4877196

Our development model does not specify any rules about how fixes
should be made, whether typing new code or reverting code, nor who
should do it.

Maybe this is just an exceptional week this week?  I have no desire to
revert anyones code, I've always preferred that we simply follow our
process as written, above, like Eliot did the other day.  Slapping
needless graffitti on the Tracing Messages Browser which I developed
in VA, VW and Squeak in the 1990's was just offensive to me.  I stand
my these two reverts.  If someone is truly open to an impartial
discussion, they will be willing to begin the discussion as a proposed
improvement to the status-quo, with such proposals that make these
kinds of fundamental UI changes, beginning in the Inbox, not trunk.

Best,
  Chris


On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:48 AM, marcel.taeumel <Marcel.Taeumel at hpi.de> wrote:
> Hey Squeak Community,
>
> according to our development model here:
> https://squeakboard.wordpress.com/2009/07/02/a-new-community-development-model/
>
> If I break something, I am responsible for fixing it.
>
> So, if I meant to fix a bug such as here:
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-Morphic-mt-1119-mcz-td4890816.html
>
> And somebody raises an issue about new bugs added or some use case missed,
> is there a general need to revert that before further disscussions? More
> importantly, wouldn't I be in charge of reverting it? And not somebody
> else...
>
> Note that we all assume that any trunk committer thoroughly investigates the
> changes made and fixes yet discusses obvious issues --- before committing
> such changes. This fundamental level of trust comes with being allowed to
> commit to trunk in the first place. Nevertheless, remaining issues can
> easily discussed on the mailing list and the responsible committer can
> fix/revert them right away -- or delegate it to someone else if time is
> rare.
>
> At least, this is what I expect from every trunk committer. :-)
>
> It seems* to work pretty well:
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-ToolBuilder-Morphic-kfr-159-mcz-td4879754.html
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-Collections-mt-688-mcz-td4889675.html
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-Monticello-mt-629-mcz-td4887731.html
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-Morphic-cmm-615-mcz-td4524250.html
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-Graphics-tfel-327-mcz-td4880035.html
>
> Sometimes, it seems* to not work:
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-Morphic-cmm-1052-mcz-td4862408.htm
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-SMLoader-cmm-85-mcz-td4850418.html
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-Morphic-cmm-1120-mcz-td4890853.html
> http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-Tools-cmm-693-mcz-td4890497.html
>
> What is your opinion?
>
> Best,
> Marcel
>
> * No limit or warranty. Off-list discussions not considered. Just
> exemplified.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Who-breaks-it-fixes-it-A-Question-about-our-Development-Model-tp4891134.html
> Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>