About Bug-Fixing and Politeness
It took less than a day. And yes I was an asshole. I can’t blame the django team for fixing things too slow because being Python’s biggest framework you can break existing code easily and fixes often requires careful consideration.
All in all I’m very happy with django and love using it, but the trac always gives me a feeling I cannot really describe. If you query open tickets you can find around 800 of them and tickets I posted so far never got real attention. However that’s not a big problem because most of them where proposals or feature requests.
Two days ago someone posted that URL bug in the IRC Channel and I bookmarked it. I thought that someone of the developers would have the timeline in the RSS reader and fix that. Yesterday I then added a patch that ignores malformed unicode in those URLs and thought I could get that fixed quickly if I sent the link to the ticket to ubernostrum and got as response something like: “that requires discussing on the mailing list, I’m not sure if ignoring is the correct behavior.” And I guess my answer was something like “I’ve better things to do”.
That and the following blog post was just rude and unacceptable. I promise that I won’t do that again :-)
disclaimer: Europe/Vienna
I’m not sure how you came to the conclusion that Django is “python’s biggest framework”.
Comment by Tiberiu Ichim — Sunday, October 14th, 2007 @ 10:35 amNumber of users? Core developers? Popularity? What difference would it make in fixing a bug?
Code size? Maybe that… and I’m pretty sure that’s not true (for better or worse, Zope, the one that I know, seems to be bigger).
I came to that conclusion because of the number of actual users. The more users you have in a framework the more likely the chance that your change breaks someone’s code, even if it’s just a bugfix.
In terms of code size pylons with all the dependencies is probably about the same in size. And Zope is not a framework, it’s an application server ^^.
Comment by Armin Ronacher — Sunday, October 14th, 2007 @ 7:10 pmWithout any intention to continue this, I’ll point two things:
1. An (old-ish) comparison of code sizes for Django, Turbogears and Zope 3:
http://www.peterbe.com/plog/size-Zope3,Django,TurboGears
I’m pretty sure Pylons is not that far from Turbogears, for example, even taking SQLAlchemy into consideration.
2. Zope 3.4 has been splitted into components and it’s now possible to treat your code as “the application” instead of an addon to the Zope 3 appserver.
Comment by Tiberiu Ichim — Monday, October 15th, 2007 @ 1:25 pmhttp://blog.delaguardia.com.mx/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=72&blogId=1