james-mime4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Bagnara <apa...@bago.org>
Subject Re: [cycleclean] branch review and questions
Date Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:54:15 GMT
2010/1/7 Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org>:
>> It is NOT possible. Just look at the changelog. Every step is very
>> well explained in the commit and in the relative JIRA issue.
>>
>
> Isn't it great that now we have 'all or nothing' decision to make?

Just look at every revision one at a time. Then comment at every
revision what you like and what you don't. I'll explain why that
revision is needed for a following goal. Don't be impressed by the
amount of changes I made in few days, you have revision numbers, it's
not different than committing one revision today, one tomorrow, and so
on, spending one month committing. The complexity of the changes are
not different from what already happened in past releases.

BTW we are discussing of nothing. If you think there is something good
and something bad in the branch let's discuss of specific code,
otherwise if you think it doesn't worth your time reviewing or there
is nothing good it doesn't make any sense to discuss about how big is
the branch, what was the original goal for it and so on.

>> If you need explanations about some of that code just ask.
>
> Every time I raise a concern you basically say you know better, like
> when I complained about really bizarre contract of
> LineReaderInputStream#unread() method.

?? I said I can explain WHY I did something. I know better what I did,
I don't pretend to know better what you wrote ;-)
When you complained for the bizarre contract I reacted by improving
it. Your concerns have been very helpful.
You didn't convince me that copying the unreaded buffer was a better
option. You can veto it or you can collect more opinions against my
solution if you really think it is not ok. You know, if I write code I
write the code the way I think it must be written.

> I stated my opinion. Feel free to ignore it. If committing all these
> changes is the price to be paid for your participation in further
> development of mime4j, I guess it is the price worth paying. I just do
> not think it is okay to have made lots of API changes all over the
> project and leave us with a decision to choose all or nothing.

I never asked you for such a decision. I asked if people agreed that
the current api is a mess. I think it is a mess. The only way to fix a
mess is to make a lot of changes. The only way for me to introduce the
improvements I need in my current project is to have the mess fixed,
so I started coding to show what I mean as fix the mess. I always
think the code is the interesting thing. I have my limits, and one of
them is that I'm not able to work on a software that doesn't have a
clear architecture. And having dependency cycles most time means I
can't help improving things. I fixed dependency problems already in
mime4j 0.4 but unfortunately 0.5 and 0.6 introduced a lot more of
them, breaking the design contracts present in 0.4. Unfortunately I
had no much time to review 0.5 and 0.6, otherwise I should have
probably raised my concerns before this.

Please, let's talk about revisions and code.

If you agree that mime4j needs a refactoring, that the current API is
a mess, that the DOM classes should not depend on parser classes, that
the library entry points should be reduced to a small subset of
classes and you are fine sacrificing backward compatibility for this
then there is space for review, discuss and improve the branch until
it is ok to merge, otherwise if we have different goals there is no
way that this discussion about the branch will bring us anyway.

Please note that I'm really fine even if you prefer to follow the "no
changes in mime4j" line. It's just I need to be agile on my current
project and I need a mime parsing library with some features that is
not in mime4j but it already is in cycleclean. I can keep working on
the branch or I can work also outside this project if anyone think
that the branch is disturbing. Zero personal issues from me. I'm in
the James PMC and all I want is a good community and teamwork. There's
no point in opensource without teamwork. This doesn't mean that I will
agree on everything you say. It is good to have different ideas, so we
have much more ideas together.

Stefano

Mime
View raw message