[Mono-dev] TCP 3.0.1/2
kumpera at gmail.com
Thu Nov 29 22:50:53 UTC 2012
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 5:06 PM, james <james at mansionfamily.plus.com> wrote:
> I don't buy it. You knew who it was from.
This was never questioned.
> If there were issues with justification in the documentation with the
> original patch set, surely that should be dealt with at the time it was
> pulled in?
No explanation on why the patch worked was given. "It improves stability"
was the closest I got. Given the patch was vouched by the
of that code base it was merged.
A deadlock on the code was found, so I reverted it. Greg is free to do a
pull request on an patch that fixes the deadlock and has a proper
> You appear to be saying that:
> - patches are applied without discussion, and without adequate
> justification on the ticket (were they checked in against a ticket?)
The patch was discussed ad-nausea on this mailing list and on the github
pull request. You can look for both, both happened in the public.
> - patches were reverted without any discussion with the author (was THAT
> against a ticket?)
Bad patches are reverted. There was no ticket, just a pull request on
github. Greg's test could not be reproduced outside of his environment.
> What is the process supposed to be? IS there a process?
Good code shaped in proper patches go in. Bad code goes out. It is that
Isn't this concerning? TCP/IP performance and async IO is rather important
> to anyone doing server apps.
I have no idea on what you're talking anymore. That there are bugs, or that
I broken patch was merged in?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mono-devel-list