Houston, we have a problem.

[Waldo Bastian]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 05 September 2002 02:44 am, Matthias Ettrich wrote:
> On Thursday 05 September 2002 10:48, Marc Mutz wrote:
> > Hi all!
>
> [snip]
>
> > As a demonstration of power, he today comitted a very intrusive patch
> > that, while needed for maintainability and code cleanness of KMail,
> > doesn't belong comitted this late in the release. IMO, it does not fix
> > a visible bug, but introduces new features (albeit #if 0'd out). The
> > reason repeatedly stated by Don for comitting is that he thinks the
> > workload is getting too high for him if he needs to resolve CVS
> > conflicts in his own tree[4-8].
>
> A feature that is #if 0'd out is not a new feature. Add something like this
> to reducing CVS resolving workload is a perfectly valid reason.

This is not a feature, this is an architectural cleanup that is long overdue. 
However, on the kmail list there seems to be a strange idea about what 
features are. For example, Ingo has a patch that replaces the current kmail 
busy-waiting loop (!) when waiting for gpg to finish with a decent solution 
and from what I understand that is not going to be committed before 3.1 
either, presumably because that is also a "feature".

Cheers,
Waldo
- -- 
bastian at kde.org  |   SuSE Labs KDE Developer  |  bastian at suse.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9d6L1N4pvrENfboIRAl2gAKCVQ0AzIrIQiopTLdSqRYrrnsbHZwCfUBZ2
Ii3MywsOWuhSMxp+OXcfoWo=
=7kcr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----