Plugin causing duplicate entries in the document context menu

[Kevin Funk]

On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 10:18:27 CET René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> There we go again...
> 
> First of, thanks for calling my professional background an anecdote. Really
> subtle, remind me to return the favour some day.

Disclaimer: Keeping this short.

Didn't call your background an anecdote but your believe to not touch "black 
boxes". Because quite to the contrary, that's what open-source is about: there 
are no black boxes, there's assumed to be a common code ownership (of course 
there exceptions...), you can and are actually encouraged to inspect other 
people's code to understand how it works.

> Open source software is supposed to be collaborative, and collaborative
> doesn't mean any number of people working each in their own corner on their
> own interests taking just reasonable care not to break whatever other
> (un)interesting things people have been doing.
> 
> Collaborative means you can reach out to colleagues and ask if they have
> experience with something you're planning to do or are stuck with, which is
> all I intended with this post and that seemed perfectly normal here
> (dynamic menu items showing up multiple times is something that almost has
> to have occurred in the past).
> 
> You don't want others to ask you to do their work for them, but please don't
> expect them to spend whatever time it takes to pursue things that might be
> known to be impossible or unfeasible. That kind of respect goes both ways.
> 
> That notion of a blackbox? Not mine, I'm fully aware of what a debugger can
> do and that sadly it is so often the only way to figure out how the
> KDevelop cardhouse is built.
> 
> Collaborative also means you can present something for discussion saying
> "look what I've been working on, it's probably not complete so I'm open for
> suggestions how to continue on this road".

About the collaboration bits: I honestly do not think I have to say anything 
about that; as you can see on this mailing list alone, we are very happy to 
help people with their problems, as far as we're capable to. And also, more 
likely, if we see incentive on the other computer's end of actually wanting to 
help. That's just how it works.

What we (especially me) do / does not like is the process of getting thrown 
'appetizers' at us, repeatedly, from a person which is /very well/ capable of 
/fully/ diagnosing the problem for himself - because he's a very analytical 
thinker - but doesn't do so b/c he's digressing into yet another topic or just 
not willing to spend the time required (tm).

Again, there's so much unfinished work in form of patches, questions, 
'unusual' ideas floating around by you that it gets admittedly hard to find 
motivation to help you more, on new controversial topics. Because sadly, most 
of the time, it's for the bin anyway. Either the work is left behind half-
finished on Phab [1], or ends up in your very own fork; benefiting only a 
small number of people.

I'm also sad to waste my breath on this, but this continuous behavior is 
getting to a point were it's getting almost insulting to anyone really wanting 
to collaborate and move the project forward.

Regards,
Kevin


[1] https://phabricator.kde.org/differential/query/Rjoy29wrzV3E/#R
> As it happens, I'm NOT the only one interested in bringing the CTags plugin
> to KDevelop, in fact, the idea isn't mine even and I don't think I ever
> used the thing.
> 
> The only "constructive" thing this kind of reply does is make me less
> inclined to contribute my work instead of keeping it cosely in my own fork
> - because that too is something you can do with open source.
> 
> Not sure why I wasted my breath on writing this, again, but there you go.
> 
> R.


-- 
Kevin Funk | kfunk at kde.org | http://kfunk.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20181113/70678bce/attachment-0001.sig>