| The fact that you would accept someone else unilaterally changing your code does not mean that others are obliged to accept your doing it.
Note, you unilaterally changed my code after I specifically asked you not to do it.
I still have not heard that you are going to put back what you took away, by the way. What is your response to my request?
An acceptable response to me will be that you will put it back, or that I will put it back, but that in any case, you will not remove or make large changes in my contributions without first obtaining my permission.
I think I have been reasonable about accepting changes in my contributions in the past, by way -- if I get a chance to talk about them first. For example, I deferred to Steven Yi's changes in the Fluidsynth opcodes.
Sincerely,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Istvan Varga
Sent: Oct 21, 2005 12:22 PM
To: csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Cs-dev] Re: More unasked for changes
Michael Gogins wrote:
> my code without my permission. How would you feel if I decided that
> the module loading facility was redundant and removed it without even
> asking you?
Well, try it and we will see. The worst thing that could happen is that
I would restore the code (or at least parts of it, as the fact that someone
removed it lets me know that it is being disliked and needs to be changed),
so you have nothing to lose. I am not like some others who immediately
start yelling and threatening with locking out of development as soon as
a single line of code is changed.
If you can do so with updating all code that depends on the new interface
so that nothing gets broken or degraded in functionality, I may even welcome
your work on simplifying the plugin interface. While it has some additional
features compared to the old functions (such as allowing the plugin to
register new command line options, and better error reporting), it should be
possible to merge the two interfaces somehow so that we get the best of both.
> As a matter of fact, when you introduced it, I did think
> it was redundant.
I always felt that the plugin API is far from being perfect, so it
may be useful that you brought up this issue.
> Perhaps, in the future, you will see the reasons for having language
> interfaces in the core of Csound.
I already see reasons to have language interfaces. I just do not see
the advantages of the particular implementation where they are all statically
compiled into a single monolithic library, as opposed to having a minimal
basic library and building all frontends and language bindings around that.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net |