From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1LoKFj-0000WC-6q for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:22:23 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LoKFh-0000VW-Jx for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:22:21 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LoKFg-0000Uj-0D for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:22:20 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60511 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LoKFf-0000Uc-PS for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:22:19 -0400 Received: from mail.nexedi.com ([91.121.25.85]:55022 helo=nexedi.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LoKFf-00068O-DU for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:22:19 -0400 Received: from [10.8.0.46] (unknown [10.8.0.46]) by nexedi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF503D9EF for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:22:14 +0200 (CEST) From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: The development of GRUB 2 Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 01:22:07 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <200903292029.26967.okuji@enbug.org> <49CFDC60.3060706@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200903310122.07638.okuji@enbug.org> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Split of the normal mode X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:22:22 -0000 On Tuesday 31 March 2009 00:43:01 Bean wrote: > Hi, > > I see the main objection here is about too many new modules, and the > use of script to configure boot process. I don't object to the latter any longer. Did you read my message? > But how about the new > parser/reader/menu_viewer model ? Nothing wrong. I have already proposed a similar idea for long: https://savannah.gnu.org/task/?7668 > If I put them back in one > normal.mod, but keep the parts separated in source, would that be > acceptable ? > > Also, some thoughts about grub2 authority. I do understand the needs > to keep source clean and safe for a boot loader, but sometimes the > process just seems too slow. For example, Colin's graphic menu patch > has been pending for almost half a year. IMO, if a patch implement a > generally useful feature, have no serious design faults, and don't > conflict with other parts of grub2, then it's safe to commit. For > small issues, we could fix it later. > > Perhaps we can add a testing branch, in which developers have more > freedom to commit their work. The maintainer can review them > periodically and merge selected parts with the main branch. Many open > source project have more than one branches, perhaps it'd work with > grub2 as well. I just feel headache when you say "open source" in our project. Please stop. About Colin's patch, I have *no idea*. I am sorry but I have a limitation. I can't do every thing suddenly. For branching, you can try. I had tried it in GRUB Legacy, but I concluded that our resources were not sufficient to have multiple lines. This might work if branches are used only for experimental purposes. Regards, Okuji