Yes, I agree too.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/1/3 H. Hirzel <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hannes.hirzel@gmail.com" target="_blank">hannes.hirzel@gmail.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
For me this makes sense<br>
<br>
--Hannes<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On 1/3/13, Juan Vuletich <<a href="mailto:juan@jvuletich.org">juan@jvuletich.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hi Casey,<br>
><br>
> (inline and abridged on subject)<br>
><br>
> Casey Ransberger wrote:<br>
>> I think the problem with the warnings had to do with my not<br>
>> understanding some design constraints clearly, and this clarifies;<br>
>> also, sorry if I offended, that was definitely not my intent.<br>
>> Sometimes I come off as ranty when I don't mean to: mea culpa.<br>
><br>
> Hey, don't worry. Maybe I overreacted a bit, or I made it look like that.<br>
><br>
>> ...<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> - No more annoying dialogs about unsaved changes in core when<br>
>> there aren't actually any. Everything is a package, so there<br>
>> isn't a distinction. We don't need a special method to<br>
>> determine what's part of core and what isn't WRT the warnings<br>
>> about unsaved changed. Elegance, symmetry, less blivet to<br>
>> worry about.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> This is unfair. I answered (I believe twice) about your concerns<br>
>> with those warnings, but didn't get a response from you! Please,<br>
>> let's discuss those warnings in a separate thread. If we have some<br>
>> use case(s) and some discussion, I believe we'll clarify any<br>
>> doubts and come up with something that works well for everybody.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> I thought I replied to that, but it's in my drafts. Oops. Also, I'm<br>
>> sorry about the way I phrased that. The short version of what I said<br>
>> was "I get it now, and yes, the change you suggested does make sense."<br>
>> If I'd sent that, I think this statement might have made a bit more<br>
>> sense. I brought it up here because what I was suggesting seemed to<br>
>> obviate that work.<br>
>><br>
><br>
> This is what I'm coding right now:<br>
><br>
> On quit without save:<br>
> - Warn about unsaved packages (if you don't save them, you might need to<br>
> go to the .changes file to recover your work)<br>
> - Warn about unsaved changes to core (if you don't save them, you might<br>
> need to go to the .changes file to recover your work)<br>
><br>
> On quit and save:<br>
> - Don't warn about unsaved packages. You can save them anytime.<br>
> - Do warn about unsaved changes to core (the change set will be removed,<br>
> so you'll need to gather them if you want to publish them or update<br>
> other images).<br>
><br>
> Does this make sense?<br>
><br>
> Cheers,<br>
> Juan Vuletich<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Cuis mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Cuis@jvuletich.org">Cuis@jvuletich.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org" target="_blank">http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org</a><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Cuis mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Cuis@jvuletich.org">Cuis@jvuletich.org</a><br>
<a href="http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org" target="_blank">http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br><br>