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

Nikolai Zhubr n-a-zhubr at yandex.ru
Mon Jul 26 23:01:39 CEST 2010

27.07.2010 0:15, Graeme Geldenhuys:
> On 26 July 2010 18:30, Marco van de Voort<marcov at stack.nl>  wrote:
>> If your idea was really so great, and this was really a solution, why don't
>> you simply describe it?
> Yeah, yeah, we all know you have a terrible time maintaining FPC. Most
> people can maintain legacy software, and still see chance for adding
> and improving it.
> [sorry, could not resist]

IMHO this is somewhat unfair. And generally, it's not like free software 
usually work. The core devlopers AFAIK are not on salary (at least not 
for implementing our wishes!). Proper development is quite 
time-consuming, I'm sure you know this very well. So, wouldn't it be 
better to first prepare a consistent formal proposal/description (like 
Marco suggested) or even a patch - and then if it is clearly good for 
all and is nevertheless rejected for no reason - only after that start 
flaming :)

Sorry, for off-topic, could not resist :(


More information about the fpc-devel mailing list