[mythtv] Re: [mythtv-commits] Re: Ticket #385: DVBChannel cleanup

[Isaac Richards]

On Wednesday 28 September 2005 05:57 am, Colin McCormack wrote:
> > #385: DVBChannel cleanup
> > Changes (by ijr):
> >
> >   * resolution:  => invalid
> >   * status:  reopened => closed
> >
> > Comment:
> >
> >  Then stop wasting my time and submit a patch without unnecessary
>
> changes
>
> >  in it.
>
> Wow.  I have seldom seen such incivility for such a clueless reason,
> unless an underdosage of major tranquilizers was involved.
>
> Someone cleans up some code for you, removing redundant includes, and
> they are accused of wasting your time.  They make the point that every
> compilation by every user is going to be slightly longer because of the
> boneheaded inclusion of unnecessary include files, and you accuse *them*
> of wasting *your* time?

I stated exactly why I wouldn't apply the patch in bug #376.  There were lots 
of completely meaningless changes and reordering of statements.  I closed the 
bug.  The patch was broken up into smaller parts and resubmitted (#378, #385, 
#386) with _exactly_ the same changes, nothing removed in a new bugs.  I 
closed the bugs with the same *engineering* reason as before - extraneous 
changes included in the patch.  The patch was reopened saying that I should 
accept the patch anyway, ignoring the fact that it includes changes that 
accomplish exactly nothing.  

I happen to think that that all of the above is wasting my time, starting with 
the resubmission of the exact same patch that I had already rejected once 
(for *a valid engineering reason*, no less).  

Additionally, I doubt that the include file changes have been tested on the 
various platforms that Myth supports - they often require quite different 
sets of includes.

> I seem to have wandered into the last reel of The Cable Guy.
>
> If you have a reasonable (*cough*) engineering reason to deny the patch,
> in my opinion you should state it.

I did.  Try reading the bug logs before making baseless accusations.

Isaac