From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:07:04 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] svn commit: trunk/buildroot/package:editors editors/vi In-Reply-To: <042e01c882d4$d82aa450$f1c4af0a@atmel.com> (Ulf Samuelsson's message of "Mon\, 10 Mar 2008 18\:14\:04 +0100") References: <008b01c88027$780e44a0$040514ac@atmel.com> <4D6547F3-9672-4606-90EA-88630B3565E9@valka.is> <20080307235344.GA6144@cloud.net.au> <87zlt7bmdg.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <042e01c882d4$d82aa450$f1c4af0a@atmel.com> Message-ID: <87skyy2yav.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Ulf" == Ulf Samuelsson writes: Ulf> It is not OK, to introduce this without discussing it on the Ulf> list though. Luckily, we have a method to resolve a controversy Ulf> and that is to let Eric decide. I think we should give him Ulf> maybe a week, and only if no reply the patches should be Ulf> reverted. (With possible resubmit, if Eric comes back later Ulf> with ACK) Ulf, you have added plenty of controversal stuff without discussing it on the list. I really don't see a simple cleanup like this being a big issue. And no - with all respect, considering Eric's lack of involvement the last few years - I don't see that as being a solution. Most likely he isn't reading this thread at all. Do you have any TECHNICAL objections to the patch? If not, I would suggest we keep it. Ulf> An alternative way of handling the problem is to have TWO trees. That seems to me to complicate matters rather than solving any problems. -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard