[bop-devel] AuthorizeNet MD5 Check

[Ivan Kohler]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 05:21:08PM -0700, Bill Moseley wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 04:22:55PM -0700, Ivan Kohler wrote:
> > Hi Bill,
> > 
> > If you'd like folks to review and possibly apply your changes to the 
> > official release, I suggest you send in your changes as individual 
> > patches (one for each different change) in unified format (diff -u).
> 
> As I said, I ran tidy and perl critic which modified a large number of 
> lines.  That's the bulk of the current diff as you can see.

I'm not interested in a tidy/critic diff mixed up with actual changes.  
Its a gigantic pain in the ass to wade through.

> > This is the usual way to contribute to an existing open-source 
> > project.
> 
> I know it's a pain to receive diff that covers the bulk of the file.

Sure is!  Plus, you mixed up half a dozen different changesets, some of 
which would be accepted immediately if posted individually, some of 
which may be accepted after some changes, and some of which may not be 
accepted at all.

> That's due to tidy and critic.  But, in this case it's not the diff 
> you should be looking at.

I *should* tell you where to stick it, but instead I'm trying to help 
you learn how to usefully contribute to open-source projects.  Take it 
or leave it.

I'm not looking at anything *except* useful diffs.

> To be frank, the old code was in no shape to receive incremental 
> patches.  Still could use more refactoring.

Incremental patches are what's accepted around here.

This is how every other project on the planet accepts contributions.  If 
you aren't willing to work with us and do that, then you might as well 
unsubscribe and find someone else to frustrate.

> Be honest, it would take you longer to review a few incremental 
> patches than to review this module.

Honestly, it would take me longer to pick out the changes I want from 
among all the noise and different changes in your forked module, and I 
have more important things to do that are 1) less frustrating and 2) 
actually pay my bills.

>  This module has, what, a submit method that is almost the same as 
> before and two new methods I added?
>
> > A forked version or a massive patch is unlikely to get anyone's 
> > attention.
> 
> By anyone you mean Jason and you?

There are at least three other folks with commit privledges on the 
list.  Feel free to see if you can get their attention.  At least Jason 
and I took the time to tell you what it takes to get *our* attention.  
Take it or leave it.

> Look, I spent a few days and a number of hours updating this, which 
> includes an outstanding bug marked "Important" from 2005.  If you are 
> not willing to spend twenty minutes to review the code then that's up 
> to you.

I'm not personally affected by that bug, so, no, not willing to wade 
through your gigantic patch at this time.  Maybe someone else is, but 
that isn't me, at least anytime soon.

> I made the updates available to you.  Feel free to do what ever you 
> like with it.

/dev/null is where these kinds of "updates" go as far as I'm concerned.  
The URL to your module is in the list archives if someone wants to clean 
up and submit useful diffs for consideration.  Personally, I've got to 
move on as I have better things to do with my time.

-- 
_ivan