[fpc-devel] is that intended? private type section in classes versus visibility

[Joost van der Sluis]

On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 03:03 +1100, Alexander Klenin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 02:57, Joost van der Sluis <joost at cnoc.nl> wrote:
> > 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
> > implemented.
> >
> > 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
> > discussed.
> 
> Sorry to interject, but the above is a total self-contradiction.
> You have said that new features should not be discussed,
> and in the very next paragraph -- that the discussion is mandatory.

Do not discuss new features if you have no means (time, money, others to
do it for you) to implement them. 

Following Graeme's workflow mentioned above will lead to those
discussions. Discussing new features into great detail is useless if
no-one is going to code those features. Wait with the discussion when
you want to start implementing.

Read my previous mail in the thread for some more information.

Joost.

ps: I'm wondering what wasn't clear in my mail. Maybe the sentence
'What's the use of discussing all these instead of implementing them?'
What I meant is that it is of no use to discuss all ideas first. Then,
after all ideas are discussed, start implementing the first one.