[GRASS-user] Query vector type has problems

[Vaclav Petras]

I'm sorry Markus. I'm just trying to do a thorough code review.

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Markus Neteler <neteler at osgeo.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:07 PM, Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus at gmail.com>
wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Markus Neteler <neteler at osgeo.org>
wrote:
> ...
> > However, here again, even when I leave aside the discussion above,
there is
> > a typo:
> >
> > G_warning(_("Input vector map <%s> is 3D"), opt.from->answer);
> > G_warning(_("Input vector map <%s> is 3D"), opt.to->answer);
> >
> > The second should say "Output...".
>
> No, it i correct.
>
> > Now you have to change that in both branches.
>
> No.
> Please read manual or source code.

I should probably do that, but the message should encourage user to read
the manual. The current message is not informing about the the problem.

> > And that's the problem. It would be better to refine it first in
> > trunk and then backport it all together.
>
> Please don't change it before inspecting the source code.
> You refer to "output" which I didn't touch.
>
> > This happens quite often - list of commits containing these two pairs of
> > commits (change, its immediate backport, fix of change, its immediate
> > backport).
>
> Do you refer to me??
> Just check my backports and my error rate on it. I do a lot of this
> dirty work and I don't think that I have a high error rate here.

You surely do a lot of backporting work which others do not. I'm
definitively not criticizing that. I'm sorry it sounded like this. What I'm
criticizing is a general practice of backporting things at the very same
time they are committed to trunk.

> > Sure we make mistakes, but this is unnecessary clutter.
>
> Wait.
> Before writing all this
> - read the source code first
> - check why I made the change. See also other people having the same
issue.
> - help to fix the real problem (#2734) rather than writing unrelated
> comments here.

I might be able to fix it, but for the sake of code quality, I don't want
to do it not before I will understand the motivation behind the existing
code.

> > Moreover,
> > then we claim how many commits was done in release branch between
releases,
> > but in fact significant portion of it are just these fixes of fixes
which
> > should have been backported after the code matured in trunk (my claim is
> > that even simple code needs maturation).
>
> Generally agreed. But in this case not.
>
> best,
> Markus
>
> PS: IMHO this code discussion should rather happen in grass-dev than
grass-user.

That's right.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-user/attachments/20151007/b02151d3/attachment.html>