> Can I make a suggestion that if someone is making an "obvious" change (with > the exception of changing non-working code (comments, things inside #if 0, > etc)), have a patch on the mailing list for 12-24 hrs. before putting it > in? Maybe they could say something like, I will check this in by X time > <TIMEZONE> tomorrow since this looks obvious to me. This way if the change > hurts someone who is working on a feature in their local machine that is > using the existing framework can chime in.
I disagree, obvious patches cannot reasonably invalidate the work of others, or else they are simply not obvious. At worst they can privatize a public function or remove an unused one, but then it's easy to undo that later. -- Eric Botcazou
