Re: Scripting support (PATCH)

[Marco Gerards <metgerards@student.han.nl>]

"Yoshinori K. Okuji" <okuji@enbug.org> writes:

> Now, both Marco and Vladimir work on the scripting support separately, and I'm 
> glad to see the development going well. However, we must choose either of 
> them (or even none of them, if both are not good ;) to integrate a result 
> into the official code.
>
> I understand that there are two implementations because they do not agree on 
> one or more technical issues. As the maintainer, I need to listen to opinions 
> (not mental ones, but technical ones), and determine a direction. So I ask 
> you to speak pros and cons in both implementations (especially, Vladimir and 
> Marco). Even if you are not Vladimir or Marco, if you have any opinion, feel 
> free to describe it.

Right, I felt it hard to explain the direction I'd like to take on
this list.  So I have implemented the core functionality because that
definitely has to be right.

> - What are advantages in Vladimir's implementation?

More features.

> - What are disadvantages in Vladimir's implementation?

In my opinion it is not clean enough and does not integrate with GRUB
like I would like it to.  And Vladimir's patch was way too hard to
maintain when I started working on this a week ago.

> - What are advantages in Marco's implementation?

It's more flexible, cleaner and easier to maintain.

> - What are disadvantages in Marco's implementation?

It's work in progress.

> Here are my own:
>
> - What are advantages in Vladimir's implementation?
>
> It has already implemented most features we need.

Right, but I have asked Vladimir several times for a discussion on
this mailinglist about what the features are.  That discussion did not
properly take place yet.

> - What are disadvantages in Marco's implementation?
>
> Fewer features are implemented. The kernel is bloated.

What do you mean with the kernel is bloated?  My patch moves a lot of
responsibility to commands.  I would say it is less bloated.

Thanks,
Marco