Re: Tasks - communication
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Oct 21, 2012
- 1477 views
Forked from Re: Tasks - communication
Ok, force me to think of the depressing events. I think it went something like this: code i contributed for strtok was un-needed,
I don't remember this, except in the content of:
A: std/sequence.e is based on strtok!
B: no, it's not..
http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/109731.wc http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/109719.wc
code i was writing for irc.e was recieved with "who needs irc?"
I don't remember this at all. Nothing. If this happened around March 2010, I should have known about it, unless you discussed this secretly without me. Which is fine, but it's hardly fair to blame the community (or the devs) for something that wasn't public and that they didn't know about.
We have an open ticket for an irc.e : http://openeuphoria.org/ticket/357.wc
and derisions of a mirc clone,
I do remember something along these lines with regards to eubot and something robsz1 said over a decade ago, which I more recently reported about a few years ago. There was no connection to irc.e however, except that I might have said that I wanted to redo eubotmar with net/irc.e once that was released - but that had nothing to do with robsz1 saying that eubot was too much of a mirc clone.
and when tasks.e was finalised i was told someone in the dev team would now do taskmsgs.e and my code wasn't worth looking at. My taskmsgs.e worked two years ago. Over two yrs ago i had http.e task-aware, and that contribution was rejected till just last month!
It was a cute piece of code, pretty small too. I was proud of it. I was so stupid to think humans wanted it. Last save was March 13, 2010. I have not looked at it or used it since.
Like Matt said, I think these simply got lost in the noise. Using the strongest 4 letter word on Jeremy (in the sense of "you, too!") after a long discussion on the English language was not remotely helpful for the purposes of clarity.
code i contributed for http.e was overwritten,
I'll take the blame for this. I now believe that, although Jeremy had rewritten http.e for a number of reasons (some of which were stylistic - I guess Jeremy and m_sabal have very different coding styles), he was planning on sitting on it; most likely for this very reason (to prevent other people's changes and patches to http.e from breaking). I was the one that forced Jeremy's hand.
In the grand scheme of things, I don't really see this as a big deal. A lot of my contributions to 4.0 have since been replaced. E.g., the call c stuff I did was later redone by Shawn and Matt. This sort of thing is natural and necessary to prevent bitrot.
