On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 02:47:06PM +0200, Willie Sippel wrote: ...
Isn't it just better to start with a patch that is "right", but will still show regressions, then fix those regressions, as opposed to starting with a patch that is wrong, and then hacking on it forever trying to solve the unsolvable problems that causes?
You are right, of course. I'm all for doing stuff right, and I'm not a friend of quick-and-dirty hacks myself. I simply can't understand why most serious regressions introduced in the last two years are seemingly not worked on at all - they simply seem to get ignored. I'm sorry if my mail sounded like a
Simple.
No one is paying to get it fixed ;) (And it requires a lot of effort for Joe Random Coder.)
Thats just OpenSource for you.
Ciao, Marcus