[scribus-dev] Please review / merge this patch

[Kunda Loves Scribus]

On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 5:38 AM, JLuc <jluc at no-log.org> wrote:

> Le 07/05/2014 22:17, Craig Bradney a écrit :
>
>> On 7/05/2014 10:13 pm, JLuc wrote:
>>
>>>  http://bugs.scribus.net/view.php?id=10289
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>  Jean and I are working on this from two directions - both the short cuts
>>>> for styles and enhancing
>>>> shortcut management.
>>>>
>>> Those of you who do that can build it yourself with the patch applied
>> locally. We won't merge stuff
>> that we know is broken or causes brokenness.
>> Yes.. public SVN has any of our changes as we commit them.
>>
>
> I wouldnt say that this patch is broken
> just because a careless user can get unwanted (but not destructive)
> effects with it.
> I wouldnt say its broken because if this patch is "broken",
> then most of scribus features are broken too.
>
> Even simple features as copy'n'paste could be said to be broken
> (see http://bugs.scribus.net/view.php?id=11574 and the uploaded
> screenshot)
> and there are many other examples - should we discuss a list ? -
> and so, "broken", could even be named the work and decision process itself
> also
> because this patch has first been proposed 30 months ago.
>
> So, please replace "broken" with "not 100% perfect",
> it will lead to better description of the situation,
> and to better communication with the community.
>
> During these 30 months, core team has coded several "not 100% perfect"
> features
> and has left untouched an even greater quantity of older features
> in their "not 100% perfect" state of working/or not-working.
>
> That is not consistent with the refusal of this patch and some other.
> There seem to be too strong a reluctancy to merge "foreign" works
> /OR/ not enough interest in fixing allready existing features.
>
> That should sanely be refactored/balanced.
>
> JL
>

Just some feedback from a non-dev Scribus fan here. I've been watching how
things progress in the Scribus and I can see it is a labor of love. One can
see from the wiki for example that this used to be a thriving community
with many efforts being made to improve this wonderful Libre DTP. Now
things aren't as they used to be and this FOSS project has a different
community dynamic, divided among different social media outlets (forums,
user ML, dev ML, g+, LGM, reddit etc...).

What I hear JL asking here is reasonable to debate. From a dev point of
view, I imagine there is an esthetic problem of introducing a 'broken' or
not fully bulletproof revision in to the master. Why would any dev want to
sign off on such a thing? My 2 cents FWIW is that if in the meantime it
increases usability...why not add it and mention it as a 'Known Issue' that
is being improved on..just like everything else that is being worked on..?

Ultimately anyone here that is involved by watching Mantis, MLs,
etc...offering feedback...has a want to see Scribus progress. We want to
use it and enjoy it (and we do..and we could enjoy it more) It's hard to
not be a dev and want the pace to be faster. If there was a way that we
could invest time in helping the community move initiatives through (and I
know it's been done and people have walked away from tasks). We could start
slowly and elementary... and build from there. It's an idea...and separate
from the issue above. Just planting some seeds.

Either way, I thank all the devs for their time and passion. I also thank
the non-devs that are involved for their involvement, initiatives, and for
their enthusiasm. Lets all keep our enthusiasm for this wonderful piece of
software.

Peace to you all,
/Kunda
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.scribus.net/pipermail/scribus-dev/attachments/20140521/aecbda3d/attachment.html>