Re: [PATCH] Xft patch reloaded, #3

>>>>> "ms" == Michael Sperber <[email protected]> writes:

    ms> Can we meet in the middle?

Probably not.  It's a matter of principle (see below).  Since I'm
clearly the extremist, let's do it your way.

My objections stand as stated, and I hope you will reconsider them
carefully.  But I withdraw my threat to veto.  Do what you think best.

Please note: in planning how to apply this patch, don't depend on any
contributions from me.  I was not bluffing when I implied I won't have
time to do concentrated work on Xft for a while, say, until February
at the earliest.

Eric and Matthias have my apologies for the delay and uncertainty I
imposed on them.

*****

What was this all about?

I believe that we need to demand overall quality _before_ features.
However, I see no real support for the position that one should
improve the surrounding code as much as possible, as well as do
whatever your main purpose is.  At least not if that involves asking
potential feature contributors to do more work, even though the
feature itself is done.  I know that's hard, but I really think it has
to be done.


-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.