8 Jun
2008
8 Jun
'08
4:50 a.m.
Hi!
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Alex Ionescu <ionucu(a)videotron.ca> wrote:
Yes well, if you had listened to my idea, you
would've avoided all this:
1) Magnus would've had to create a bugzilla bug report for the 'issue'
he was 'fixing'
1<- At this step, someone responsible for win32k should've gotten the
bug report, and maybe had time to reject the patch
2) Magnus would've had to commit his patch to the PR-xxx branch (Which
would've been created automatically server-side, behind Magnus' back)
2<- At this step, trunk would still be fine
3) At the end of the day, the integration suite would find the
regression in PR-xxx, and remove it from the mergeset
3<- At this step, everyone is aware that Magnus' patch caused a
regression, and the patch was removed from the mergeset
4) The integration suite commits the latest mergeset
4<- At this step, everyone's patches are in, trunk still boots, and
Magnus's patch is to be reviewed.
But of course, you stubbornly continue to go forward without any sort
of codebase management...
Well,,, I guess if I was more assertive this would not been a problem....
I volunteered to be the Gdi rewrite leader, when I became the leader I
was not the leader. Everyone else assumed they would do AS THY WILT
and move on. Hay I tried to keep it under control I guess I'm just not
assertive enough.... It's like fighting the undertow at high tide. I
can't keep up with it......