[fpc-devel] is that intended? private type section in classes versus visibility
Joost van der Sluis
joost at cnoc.nl
Thu Aug 12 17:57:01 CEST 2010
On Mon, 2010-08-02 at 10:41 +0200, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> Op 2010-07-30 17:58, Joost van der Sluis het geskryf:
> > I'm affraid that when the discussion is over, no-one is willing or able
> > to develop what has been concluded from the discussion.
> I can only speak for myself. My workflow is as follows...
> * I see a gap (missing feature) in FPC, Lazarus IDE etc that I would like
> * If it's something only I will use, I implement it locally.
> * If it's something I think others could find useful too, I discuss
> the idea on the mailing list.
> * If the discussion went well and the idea is still viable, I
> add it to my todo list.
> Just because I discussed something, doesn't mean I will implement it
> immediately. I have a large todo list, and items that make it onto my todo
> list, DO get implemented (in my own time).
This approach will lead to a lot of wasted time of the core developers.
They have to discuss all kinds of ideas, but none of them get
All developers can think of more new features then they can code. What's
the use of discussing all these instead of implementing them? If the
core developers would start discussing all their ideas, and only
implement them if they have time left, the development will stop.
And please, don't say that we can just skip the discussion. If the
core-team would do that the discussion is far less useful, because they
can still have some reasons to reject the patch, which were not
More information about the fpc-devel