From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 18 May 2001 12:00:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 18 May 2001 12:00:03 -0400 Received: from snark.tuxedo.org ([207.106.50.26]:59400 "EHLO snark.thyrsus.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 18 May 2001 11:59:58 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 11:58:39 -0400 From: "Eric S. Raymond" To: Alan Cox Cc: Keith Owens , CML2 , kbuild-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [kbuild-devel] Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up Message-ID: <20010518115839.E14309@thyrsus.com> Reply-To: esr@thyrsus.com Mail-Followup-To: "Eric S. Raymond" , Alan Cox , Keith Owens , CML2 , kbuild-devel@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <1694.990198581@ocs3.ocs-net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk on Fri, May 18, 2001 at 04:39:57PM +0100 Organization: Eric Conspiracy Secret Labs X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox : > > In general this is the best option, if you create a non-standard > > configuration for machine foo then it is your problem, not everybody > > else's. > > Which makes CML2 inferior to CML1 again. Now if it could parse CML1 rulesets > this whole discussion wouldn't be needed. I think you're confusing a couple of different issues here, Alan. Even supposing CML2 could parse CML1 rulesets, the design question about how configuration *should* work (that is, what kind of user experience we want to create and who we optimize ruleset design for) wouldn't go away. I'm raising these questions now because CML2's capabilities invite thinking about them. But they're independent of the underlying language. -- Eric S. Raymond To stay young requires the unceasing cultivation of the ability to unlearn old falsehoods. -- Lazarus Long