On Sunday 02 June 2002 06:03, you wrote:
> On Fri, 31 May 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> What you and other very vocal proponents of kbuild25 don't understand is
> that you need break it up __functionally__. That is, add one feature at a
> time. That way, good features can be added without much of a discussion,
> and debatable features can be, well, debated.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't see Keith doing this anytime soon. He's too much in
> love with his baby to risk seeing parts of it being thrown away, so he's
> taking an all-or-nothing attitude.
Fortunately, he's got help now:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?a=102296100300003&r=1&w=2
> Fortunately, it is precisely what Kai is doing. He deserves a big THANKS
> for doing it, not your silly bashing. I also saw some good work on this
> from Sam Ravnborg on the list.
If I got the impression that Kai was actually trying to work with the team,
I'd thank him for that. He appears to be doing just the opposite, and I
stand by my comment that that is divisive. He could accomplish the same
thing result he wants - patching up old kbuild - and bring parts of kbuild
2.5 into the tree, reducing the size of that patch *at the same time*,
instead of (apparently) trying to marginalize that work. That is what I'd
call cooperation.
We have a perfect - and rare - situation here where the two can coexist in
the same tree, and may the best and fastest eventually predominate. Let's
take advantage of that: let's have both in parallel for a while.
-- Daniel- 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 Jun 07 2002 - 22:00:11 EST