[fpc-devel] Crosscompiling win towards darwin

[Alfred]

>Well, we're talking about two different things. In this interpretation,
>NewPascal serves as some kind of FPC-experimental branch. Which is 
>nice,
>and nothing to have against it.
>
>But still, before merging anything to a master branch, there should be 
>a
>way to review patches for obvious mistakes, or simply doing things in a
>wrong way. I see your pull request was accepted without comments in 
>four
>hours after its submission. Which - given the amount of IFDEFs it
>contains, still "ouch", IMO. No offense, and nothing personal, just the
>criticism of the general approach towards code quality in a project 
>with
>the size of FPC.
>
>However, I agree that the FPC team should have a more streamlined way 
>of
>accepting and reviewing patches, than posting diffs to a bugtracker or 
>a
>mailing list. The Bazaar went elsewhere over the years, which is always 
>a
>problem for an opensource project. But the tooling problem is only part 
>of
>the story.

Thanks for your elaboration.
And again, this is why we needed NewPascal.
I know that my patches are not perfect, and perhaps also not valid.
Meaning that we would have to wait for ages to get things done in FPC 
trunk.
Which is good IMHO: FPC trunk must be 100% ok for all.

All NewPascal changes are out in the open. Ready for use and review.
The NewPascal contributors hope that one day, after thorough review, 
these changes will find their way into FPC.
And yes, sometimes these changes will cause an "ough", but that is also 
part of the fun ... ;-)