[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:0.156 / U:5.060 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site