Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S292316AbSBPDNg>; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 22:13:36 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S292324AbSBPDN0>; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 22:13:26 -0500
Received: from zeus.kernel.org ([204.152.189.113]:45247 "EHLO zeus.kernel.org")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S292318AbSBPDNR>;
	Fri, 15 Feb 2002 22:13:17 -0500
X-Originating-IP: [12.251.86.8]
From: "William Scott Lockwood III" <thatlinuxguy@hotmail.com>
To: "Larry McVoy" <lm@bitmover.com>
Cc: "Eric S. Raymond" <esr@thyrsus.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0202151803220.27197-100000@weyl.math.psu.edu> <OE58H4DpHUJLwVImmyy0000a1a8@hotmail.com> <20020215175948.F26554@work.bitmover.com>
Subject: Re: Disgusted with kbuild developers
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 20:08:38 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Message-ID: <OE25w8ONVJhuXbMxAnW000152d6@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Feb 2002 02:08:38.0682 (UTC) FILETIME=[D91667A0:01C1B68E]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

again, if you all would spend 1/10th of your time helping as opposed to just
slaming it, I'd be impressed.  CML2 makes a WORLD of difference for me
personally.  But hey, what do I know?  I'm just a network administrator, I'm
not a kernel wizard, so feel free to just totally disregard my opinions...

----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry McVoy" <lm@bitmover.com>
To: "William Scott Lockwood III" <thatlinuxguy@hotmail.com>
Cc: "Alexander Viro" <viro@math.psu.edu>; "Eric S. Raymond"
<esr@thyrsus.com>; <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: Disgusted with kbuild developers


> On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 07:14:17PM -0600, William Scott Lockwood III
wrote:
> > Here's an idea Al:  Put up, or shut up.  Where's your code to replace
CML1
> > with?  I like Eric's system, and find it's MUCH more useful in a
production
> > environment than CML1 was.  Where's your replacement idea?
>
> I think Al's work on the kernel speaks for itself.  He's been putting up
> just fine, thank you.  And I think you're looking in the wrong place,
> Al has expressed no interest (that I'm aware of) in rewriting this code.
> As a user of the new system, a pretty typical user, his opinion counts.
>
> I don't think that you're really getting the point.  Nobody is saying that
> CML1 is the greatest thing since sliced bread.  What they are saying is
that
> it seems to work pretty well, yes it could be better, but CML2 isn't
shaping
> up to be an improvement so much as a Eric Raymond Language exercise.
Noone
> begrudges Eric his right to come up with as many little languages as he
wants.
> But when he asks the kernel developers to use them, he'd better be
prepared
> to hear each and every thing they find wanting, and address the majority
of
> those issues.  That hasn't happened.  Instead, there have been a lot of
> flame wars, politics, protests about Linus, etc.
> --
> ---
> Larry McVoy            lm at bitmover.com
http://www.bitmover.com/lm
>
-
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/