On Fri, 2002-02-15 at 15:38, Dave Jones wrote:
> This is something I never understood. CML1 has served us for
> 10 years or so, and suddenly its declared "unfixable".
> "I'm not hacking that, I'll fix it in CML2" seemed to become
> the attitude. End result ? Linus got pissed off with your
> complaints of non-inclusion, and _fixed_ one of the CML1 problems
> (Configure.help) And how long did it take ? ISTR it was around
> an hour after his first mail was sent to you, me & Jeff.
> 1 hour. Versus the year you spent procrastinating about how
> CML2 would fix it.
Amen. This whole "CML1 vs CML2" thing is silly. We don't see other
"maintainers" refusing to touch code, having no relation to code, and
then coming out of no-where and offering some external solution for the
perceived problem.
If you _develop_ kernel code and see a problem with the configure
system, then fix the problems. As Linus says, let stuff evolve.
> Sure CML2 fixes some bits that are not easily fixed in CML1,
> but I wonder sometimes how much of it is/was fixable.
Agreed, but CML2 has a whole bunch of new "features" too which will be
shoved down our throats!!
Robert Love
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 15 2002 - 21:01:10 EST