[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 27410] [Gtk] adding GObject Language bindings auto-generator

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27410





--- Comment #9 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl at lkcl.net>  2009-07-18 13:24:03 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > plus - remember, jan: you're asking me to interfere with the core of the code,
> > by maintaining two separate versions.  one that's useable and useful; the other
> > that's an educational process for the webkit team.  the most appropriate time
> > for that educational process to have taken place was: when the work was being
> > developed - or at least a reasonable time thereafter.
> 
> Luke, 

 hellooo.

> with all due respect, I talked with you on IRC before you'd even started
> writing any of this code.

 yes.

>  At that time I told you that contributing
> incremental patches for a large feature was the only reasonable approach to
> take. 

 *sigh*... it's such a long time ago that i honestly now don't remember.
 and, i was fairly focussed and committed to making the most of the time
 that i had available and had committed.  [and, to be honest, the
 significance would not have sunk in at that very early stage]

 that meant 100% focus.  i knew full well that if i stopped, the work would
 not be completed.  not because i would be lazy or anything, but because
 simply the sheer quantity of different levels of expertise required and
 the overwhelming number of functions, properties and objects - in order
 to keep a map of everything that's going on is just... too much to have
 to re-remember _even_ after a break of two weeks.

 i don't know if you can appreciate that - going well beyond reasonable
 mental boundaries, to focus on a specialist area so intensly that it
 causes actual mental pain and in some cases physical harm.

 i can tell you that i've done that several times, before now, in order
 to get results, and have recovered afterwards and had absolutely _no_
 desire to return to that time, whatsoever.

 so - it was the only way [that i personally could have done it], and
 now it's done, i'm not going through that again - not for anyone.


> It's a process that every other WebKit contributor has found to be
> reasonable, and that has worked well for many significant features (a
> JavaScript bytecode interpreter, a JavaScript JIT compiler, SVG support,
> auto-generated JavaScript and Objective-C DOM bindings, WML support, ports of
> WebKit to Windows, Qt, GTK, wxWidgets, Haiku, … to name only a few).

 i fully appreciate that.  gosh, who was it - sam i think who did the obj-c
 bindings - said that he managed an incremental process.

 what's different in this case is that sam knew the process: i didn't.

 so, i sent in a patch, and i waited, and waited, and nobody reviewed it,
 so i moved on with the work.

 _then_ i discover that there's this obscure box you have
 to put a "?" in that brings it to peoples' attention, but by then,
 it was far too late.

 i had already moved beyond the initial stages - the ones that i am being
 asked to commit time, money and resources to to "go back" to.

 if you want to "go backwards" - fine: you can look at and review those
 earlier patches.

 but i am really really sorry - i am _not_ going to go backwards to a time
 where i will have to drag things out of long-term memory at a time where
 i was absolutely focussed for eleven hour days and i do mean on nothing
 but these bindings.

 mistakes have been made, yes.  misunderstandings, yes.  go backwards? no.
 move forwards? it's truly up to you to come up with an initiative to do that.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.webkit.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.