[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Possible breakthrough in the CML2 logjam?
    "Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
    > Larry McVoy <>:
    > > > I need you to tell Linus that your concerns have been met
    > > > and sponsor CML2 to go in, so I can stop perpetually re-fighting old
    > > > battles.
    > >
    > > That's a fine thing for anyone and everyone to say *after* they have
    > > used the system and like it.
    > >
    > > If you are asking for a blessing in advance, which is how I read that,
    > > I would think there is zero chance of that happening, it's not how work
    > > is done on the kernel.
    > We're talking about design objections here. Specific objections to actual
    > CML2 bugs, including rulebase and UI bugs, are a different level. What
    > I am asking is if Jeff will bless the *architecture* provided the global-
    > dependency issue is met.

    Larry's right. I won't (and notice, did not in previous e-mail) provide
    a pre-blessing. I will promise to be fair.

    But as I said, let's wait a bit and see what others say. Alan for
    example noted that bit about improving the existing tools.


    Jeff Garzik | "Why is it that attractive girls like you
    Building 1024 | always seem to have a boyfriend?"
    MandrakeSoft | "Because I'm a nympho that owns a brewery?"
    | - BBC TV show "Coupling"
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.022 / U:3.620 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site