Tue Jun 1 18:33:56 CDT 2010
On Jun 1, 2010, at 1:57 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
>>> Well - but that is because you don't maintenance. Imagine a
>>> maintainer puts in a lot of effort to make the code well-documented
>>> and tested. Then, you have put in new code that has neither
>>> documentation nor tests. As a good maintainer, it's really painful
>>> for them that there's new code without documentation or tests. They
>>> can only feel abused in that situation, because it seems as if you are
>>> expecting them to clean up after you - without asking.
>> I don't think that is fair. I have been "maintaining" SciPy and NumPy code for over 10 years. I have done an immense amount of work in porting SciPy to NumPy and continuing to fix bugs that I am made aware of. I don't have as much time to commit to SciPy as I would like.
> I wasn't really saying whether it was fair or not, I was only trying
> to explain why it might cause offense.
> When I say that you don't do maintenance, I mean that you are not
> currently the person who has to make sure that the code is readable
> and maintainable. That is hard and often thankless work.
> I presume that you agree that numpy and scipy code should have
> documentation and tests. I presume also that when you commit code
> without documentation or tests, that you do not usually intend to come
> back and do these later - say - before the next release. That means
> that someone else has to do it. It will take them a lot longer than
> it would take you because they don't know the code as well.
No, that is actually not what I imply but checking something in to the trunk. I plan to submit tests and docs before the next release when I commit code. I don't expect anyone else to do that for me. I always welcome help, but I don't expect it.
I really think this is more about how people view commits to the trunk than anything else. I like to use SVN as a version control system. My commits to trunk are always more incremental. I like to get things committed in self-contained chunks. Adding the requirement to put in documentation and tests before committing stretches out that "incremental" work element to longer than I ever have time for in one sitting.
Clearly, if I were using DVCS to a published branch that could be then merged to the trunk this problem would not have arisen. I see that I need to move to that style. People are reading far more into my committing to trunk than I ever meant to imply.
More information about the SciPy-Dev