Consolidating code
Locked
 
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 I have been going through the code, and finding a frustration. it seems that a lot of people are finding what i call short cuts for their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole picture. My frustration is the effort to maintain such code. Yes I know I am making a general statement with no examples. I believe anyone that is looking at maintain this code would discover the same thing. So I ask all those that are creating patches, or adding new code, please look at the whole system before you make changes and see how we can reuse instead re-create the wheel over and over with just minor changes. End of rant. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJtQNlrP3NbaWWqE4RApi8AKC43xj4D66AlEQ8GmDYiZ06HvqtOACfeOAD CH2AsiocXJH+0WuwFEM34C0= =RthS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
|
Ranting without any details is not constructive or actionable. Hire a shrink. -David On Mar 9, 2009, at 5:54 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > I have been going through the code, and finding a frustration. > it seems that a lot of people are finding what i call short cuts for > their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole > picture. > My frustration is the effort to maintain such code. > Yes I know I am making a general statement with no examples. > I believe anyone that is looking at maintain this code would discover > the same thing. > > So I ask all those that are creating patches, or adding new code, > please > look at the whole system before you make changes and see how we can > reuse instead re-create the wheel over and over with just minor > changes. > > End of rant. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFJtQNlrP3NbaWWqE4RApi8AKC43xj4D66AlEQ8GmDYiZ06HvqtOACfeOAD > CH2AsiocXJH+0WuwFEM34C0= > =RthS > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 and from your response you don't agree. interesting. David E Jones sent the following on 3/9/2009 8:27 AM: > > Ranting without any details is not constructive or actionable. > > Hire a shrink. > > -David > > > On Mar 9, 2009, at 5:54 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: > > I have been going through the code, and finding a frustration. > it seems that a lot of people are finding what i call short cuts for > their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole picture. > My frustration is the effort to maintain such code. > Yes I know I am making a general statement with no examples. > I believe anyone that is looking at maintain this code would discover > the same thing. > > So I ask all those that are creating patches, or adding new code, please > look at the whole system before you make changes and see how we can > reuse instead re-create the wheel over and over with just minor changes. > > End of rant. Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJtUETrP3NbaWWqE4RAqLuAJ4yWB8y2FY3KUoTl056/EYqv9ORxQCgleOY xqPRKIv1x/vbdeobrLsg8Ys= =fftF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
|
Did I say or imply that? Now we're getting into trolling... so unless you want to talk about something specific... -David On Mar 9, 2009, at 10:17 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > and from your response you don't agree. > interesting. > > David E Jones sent the following on 3/9/2009 8:27 AM: >> >> Ranting without any details is not constructive or actionable. >> >> Hire a shrink. >> >> -David >> >> >> On Mar 9, 2009, at 5:54 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: >> >> I have been going through the code, and finding a frustration. >> it seems that a lot of people are finding what i call short cuts for >> their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole >> picture. >> My frustration is the effort to maintain such code. >> Yes I know I am making a general statement with no examples. >> I believe anyone that is looking at maintain this code would discover >> the same thing. >> >> So I ask all those that are creating patches, or adding new code, >> please >> look at the whole system before you make changes and see how we can >> reuse instead re-create the wheel over and over with just minor >> changes. >> >> End of rant. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFJtUETrP3NbaWWqE4RAqLuAJ4yWB8y2FY3KUoTl056/EYqv9ORxQCgleOY > xqPRKIv1x/vbdeobrLsg8Ys= > =fftF > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by BJ Freeman
Have you some examples to make things more clear ? Eventually generalized to have a bigger picture...
Jacques From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]> > I have been going through the code, and finding a frustration. > it seems that a lot of people are finding what i call short cuts for > their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole picture. > My frustration is the effort to maintain such code. > Yes I know I am making a general statement with no examples. > I believe anyone that is looking at maintain this code would discover > the same thing. > > So I ask all those that are creating patches, or adding new code, please > look at the whole system before you make changes and see how we can > reuse instead re-create the wheel over and over with just minor changes. > > End of rant. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFJtQNlrP3NbaWWqE4RApi8AKC43xj4D66AlEQ8GmDYiZ06HvqtOACfeOAD > CH2AsiocXJH+0WuwFEM34C0= > =RthS > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > |
|
|
In reply to this post by David E Jones-3
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 actually David I was not looking for Validation. Nor was I looking for anyone to chime in. Nor did I want to start a discussion. Just bring up an awareness. In that scope, bringing up a specific case only focuses on that problem not the general point. If those coding don't understand, then there is no way I am going to change them. I believe the way I said is valid and will stand by that. David E Jones sent the following on 3/9/2009 9:27 AM: > > Did I say or imply that? > > Now we're getting into trolling... so unless you want to talk about > something specific... > > -David > > > On Mar 9, 2009, at 10:17 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: > > and from your response you don't agree. > interesting. > > David E Jones sent the following on 3/9/2009 8:27 AM: >>>> >>>> Ranting without any details is not constructive or actionable. >>>> >>>> Hire a shrink. >>>> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 9, 2009, at 5:54 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: >>>> >>>> I have been going through the code, and finding a frustration. >>>> it seems that a lot of people are finding what i call short cuts for >>>> their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole picture. >>>> My frustration is the effort to maintain such code. >>>> Yes I know I am making a general statement with no examples. >>>> I believe anyone that is looking at maintain this code would discover >>>> the same thing. >>>> >>>> So I ask all those that are creating patches, or adding new code, please >>>> look at the whole system before you make changes and see how we can >>>> reuse instead re-create the wheel over and over with just minor changes. >>>> >>>> End of rant. Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJtUeorP3NbaWWqE4RAhQhAKDFnL7Hu9whgNXEV8YrhWLstI9q/QCgqByC 3a/TiHvS5u32qOZsbkdQuYM= =s+nB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 I believe that those that are coding should know. if they don't this is not the place to teach. Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 3/9/2009 9:37 AM: > Have you some examples to make things more clear ? Eventually > generalized to have a bigger picture... > > Jacques > > From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]> >> I have been going through the code, and finding a frustration. >> it seems that a lot of people are finding what i call short cuts for >> their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole picture. >> My frustration is the effort to maintain such code. >> Yes I know I am making a general statement with no examples. >> I believe anyone that is looking at maintain this code would discover >> the same thing. >> >> So I ask all those that are creating patches, or adding new code, please >> look at the whole system before you make changes and see how we can >> reuse instead re-create the wheel over and over with just minor changes. >> >> End of rant. >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) >> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org >> >> iD8DBQFJtQNlrP3NbaWWqE4RApi8AKC43xj4D66AlEQ8GmDYiZ06HvqtOACfeOAD >> CH2AsiocXJH+0WuwFEM34C0= >> =RthS >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> > > > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJtUhgrP3NbaWWqE4RAhihAJ4hWDENnazfUn6+5/sc/Htd9z8msgCgwQRM wkAlfevTvui09j5qjooMQ5Y= =NTUa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
|
In reply to this post by BJ Freeman
On Mar 9, 2009, at 10:45 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > actually David I was not looking for Validation. > Nor was I looking for anyone to chime in. > Nor did I want to start a discussion. Mailing lists are for discussion... in fact isn't that all they're for? Communities are all about collaboration, which requires communication among a large number of people, and that's what we use the mailing lists for. > Just bring up an awareness. > In that scope, bringing up a specific case only focuses on that > problem > not the general point. Is this your general point, something about: "short cuts for their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole picture"? That doesn't increase my awareness of anything, nor could I even comment on that... it doesn't mean anything to me... it seems to describes human nature and nothing about the code in the project... but I really don't know. > If those coding don't understand, then there is no way I am going to > change them. Try communicating in terms that people can understand, and also try avoiding an attack on people you wish to influence. You've burned a lot of bridges in the past and you seem to be trying to burn more... what are your intentions here? > I believe the way I said is valid and will stand by that. I couldn't say if it is valid or not, I really don't know. I have no idea what you're trying to express because there is nothing in your comment, not even a description of a general pattern that you find to be a problem. Please try to look at things from other people's point of view. Have you ever noticed that what you call one thing someone else will describe using very different words? Have you ever noticed that people have different opinions of the same things? If you just talk about your opinion, and no one knows what it is an opinion of, how can they possibly communicate with you about it? If you're looking for a definition of "troll", this is it! And here I am feeding the troll. Do you understand why that is? Trolls attack people using comments about things that cannot be discussed, leading only to general bad feelings and wasting people's time and energy. I'd say that well describes this thread... Be clear and try to communicate with others in a friendly way, or what's the point? -David > David E Jones sent the following on 3/9/2009 9:27 AM: >> >> Did I say or imply that? >> >> Now we're getting into trolling... so unless you want to talk about >> something specific... >> >> -David >> >> >> On Mar 9, 2009, at 10:17 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: >> >> and from your response you don't agree. >> interesting. >> >> David E Jones sent the following on 3/9/2009 8:27 AM: >>>>> >>>>> Ranting without any details is not constructive or actionable. >>>>> >>>>> Hire a shrink. >>>>> >>>>> -David >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mar 9, 2009, at 5:54 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I have been going through the code, and finding a frustration. >>>>> it seems that a lot of people are finding what i call short cuts >>>>> for >>>>> their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole >>>>> picture. >>>>> My frustration is the effort to maintain such code. >>>>> Yes I know I am making a general statement with no examples. >>>>> I believe anyone that is looking at maintain this code would >>>>> discover >>>>> the same thing. >>>>> >>>>> So I ask all those that are creating patches, or adding new >>>>> code, please >>>>> look at the whole system before you make changes and see how we >>>>> can >>>>> reuse instead re-create the wheel over and over with just minor >>>>> changes. >>>>> >>>>> End of rant. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFJtUeorP3NbaWWqE4RAhQhAKDFnL7Hu9whgNXEV8YrhWLstI9q/QCgqByC > 3a/TiHvS5u32qOZsbkdQuYM= > =s+nB > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by BJ Freeman
Introspection is hard without external help
Jacques From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]> > I believe that those that are coding should know. > if they don't this is not the place to teach. > > > Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 3/9/2009 9:37 AM: >> Have you some examples to make things more clear ? Eventually >> generalized to have a bigger picture... >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]> >>> I have been going through the code, and finding a frustration. >>> it seems that a lot of people are finding what i call short cuts for >>> their particular part of the code with out looking at the whole picture. >>> My frustration is the effort to maintain such code. >>> Yes I know I am making a general statement with no examples. >>> I believe anyone that is looking at maintain this code would discover >>> the same thing. >>> >>> So I ask all those that are creating patches, or adding new code, please >>> look at the whole system before you make changes and see how we can >>> reuse instead re-create the wheel over and over with just minor changes. >>> >>> End of rant. >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) >>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org >>> >>> iD8DBQFJtQNlrP3NbaWWqE4RApi8AKC43xj4D66AlEQ8GmDYiZ06HvqtOACfeOAD >>> CH2AsiocXJH+0WuwFEM34C0= >>> =RthS >>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >>> >> >> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFJtUhgrP3NbaWWqE4RAhihAJ4hWDENnazfUn6+5/sc/Htd9z8msgCgwQRM > wkAlfevTvui09j5qjooMQ5Y= > =NTUa > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > |
«
Return to OFBiz - User
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |