Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: [PATCH] Port utility functions to Solaris

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 10:45:15PM -0500, Cole Robinson wrote:

> >> Hmm, 90% of this patch is a huge mechanical change which has nothing
> >> to do with this commit subject. I think it's better to separate
> >> the two changes.
> 
> I really don't think it's unreasonable to ask that these two unrelated
> changes be split. The commits will be more self contained, and it will
> be easier for review.

Hmpph, OK.

> >  Locking away the contents of util.py and never changing it
> > again[1] makes it really hard to *NOT* maintain the API - any patch touches
> > that file implies the patch is broken.
> 
> I don't follow this. By moving the actual content to _util.py, API can
> _still_ be broken: someone could add a new function argument without
> a default value.

I was really referring to someone inadvertently *adding* to the API.

I'll go ahead and move most stuff back to util.py.

regards
john

_______________________________________________
et-mgmt-tools mailing list
et-mgmt-tools@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools

[Home]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Legacy List]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Red Hat 9 Bible]     [Fedora Bible]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

Powered by Linux

Google
  Web www.spinics.net