[haiku-development] Re: app_server patch
- From: Michael Oliveira <michaelvoliveira@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 19:49:22 -0700 (PDT)
Is there any plan to include it into Alpha 3?
Looncaz did a great job here...
Regards,
Michael Vinícius de Oliveira
----- Mensagem original -----
> De: Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>
> Para: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc:
> Enviadas: Quarta-feira, 13 de Abril de 2011 11:38
> Assunto: [haiku-development] Re: app_server patch
>
>
> On 2011-04-13 at 09:47:35 [+0200], Joseph Groover <looncraz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> I have completed a (hopefully) fully working patch along the lines
>> mentioned before.
>>
>> You can find it at the following URL along with some more detailed
>> information for those interested.
>>
>> http://looncraz.tripod.com/haiku/
>>
>> At this point I haven't created a ticket, but will do so when I have
> time.
>>
>> This patch is not yet finalized and is based on changes I made to
>> r41206. The patch file is ~500kb.
>
> Mentioning such a figure doesn't help to motivate anyone to look at it. You
> should at least also mention that most of that weight stems from an added
> bitmap resource and that the code part of the patch is only around 2k
> lines. I haven't looked at why you added the bitmap. Your patch summary
> doesn't say so.
>
>> ALL opinions wanted!
>
> First of all, most people prefer not to have to download and unzip a patch
> before being able to look at it. Also, Trac's patch viewer is rather nice
> IMO, so I'd recommend using it for larger patches (anything longer than a
> few hundred lines).
>
> I'm not an app server guy, so I'll only comment on the build system
> part:
> The Decorator rule you introduced is mostly a copy of the Addon rule.
> There's no need for the code duplication; the Addon rule could just be
> invoked. Other than that there's nothing that makes the Decorator rule
> decorator specific. I believe the Addon rule is lacking a parameter for
> resources only because there have been only few add-on's that need them (if
> there are any at all) and calling the AddResources rule manually isn't much
> trouble either. I don't see any reason not to add such a parameter, though.
>
> CU, Ingo
>
Other related posts:
