Hi Doug,
> Remember, the criteria for a no-go is that a feature
is not testable.
> The vote does need to be unanimous.
ok, that's true, the feature can be tested, though my test
results are negative.
I wanted to give a signal that a feature that was worked on
even got worse in my environment, and I realize now that voting -1 was not the
appropriate way to do this. And oooops, I had not thought that the vote actually
needs to be unanimous so that by my veto I can actually stop the
world.
So please excuse me for not reading close enough and
causing you sweat. In the light of this
please count me as +1
and so you have unanimous approval for the release
candidate.
> Actually, as a
follow up, I am unable to reproduce the problems Norbert is seeing. The search
features work fine for qhull in a
Thanks, Doug, for looking into this so quickly. I am
frustrated, but familiar with the fact that Search features consistently refuse
to work for my usecases while many others are happy. I'll happily help out with
more information, testing scenarios and stuff on the
bugzillas.
> In fact, I’d still recommend releasing even with
the defect.
> People can still get their work done even without
these features. Remember emacs
I do not fully agree here. I think that source
navigation is a key productivity feature for an IDE and a failure in this area
cannot be taken lightly. Yeah, it may not be worth cancelling a release
entirely, and, ok, if it's only me that is experiencing the bug then the rest of
the world must move on, of course.
> I will be in a better mood when 3.1 is out the
door
Sorry again for causing you sweat.
Hope to contribute to your happiness in the
future.
Norbert Ploett
|