I completely agree with you and one of the problems is that some people
did not take well
reviews of their code. I hope that we will be able to change this spirit.
> [rant]
> This is a weird class! It's protocol seems convoluted to me (even though it
> only contains one operation!).
>
> The standard dialog #actionBlock: is eschewed for #selectedChangedBlock:,
> which lets you know every time an item is checked or unchecked. I'm not
> clear on the use case for that verbose level of updating. I would think
> you'd mostly be interested in the final state once the dialog was accepted.
>
> In addition, there is a #selectedRemotes instVar, but it never gets updated
> and has no getter.
>
> Maybe I'm just not getting it, but it seems like something was quickly
> hacked together as an experiment to serve an immediate purpose without much
> design thought. While I love new features, this worries me because it sounds
> very familiar and three forks may be one too many ;) Maybe we should have a
> more formal code review procedure for shiny new features (non-bug
> fix/enhancement)?
> [/rant]
>
> 14303 RemotesManager: Make more generally useful
>
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?14303> Initial slice incoming...
>
>
>
> -----
> Cheers,
> Sean
> --
> View this message in context:
http://forum.world.st/RemotesManager-Fishiness-tp4786315.html> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>