From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 15 May 2001 16:32:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 15 May 2001 16:32:29 -0400 Received: from smtp1.cern.ch ([137.138.128.38]:29700 "EHLO smtp1.cern.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 15 May 2001 16:32:11 -0400 To: esr@thyrsus.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kbuild-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up In-Reply-To: <20010505192731.A2374@thyrsus.com> <20010513112543.A16121@thyrsus.com> From: Jes Sorensen Date: 15 May 2001 22:32:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: "Eric S. Raymond"'s message of "Sun, 13 May 2001 11:25:44 -0400" Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.070096 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.96) Emacs/20.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>>>> "Eric" == Eric S Raymond writes: Eric> Jes Sorensen : Eric> # These were separate questions in CML1 derive MAC_SCC from MAC Eric> & SERIAL derive MAC_SCSI from MAC & SCSI derive SUN3_SCSI from Eric> (SUN3 | SUN3X) & SCSI >> As Alan already pointed out thats assumption is invalid. Eric> I'm in touch with Ray Knight directly and will fix this as he Eric> requests. If Ray wants to fix things, it's just fine with me. >> Yes I have objections. I thought I had made this clear a long time >> ago: Go play with another port and leave the m68k port alone. Eric> Does this mean you'll take over maintaining the CML2 rules files Eric> for the m68k port, so I don't have to? That would be wonderful. For a start, so far there has been no reason whatsoever to change the format of definitions. Eric> Reasoned objections can change my behavior. Grunting Eric> territorial challenges at me will not. You have two options: Eric> (1) persuade Linus that the whole CML2 thing is a bad idea and Eric> should be dropped, or (2) work with me to correct any errors I Eric> have made and improve the system. Growling at me and hoping I Eric> go away won't work, not when I've invested a year's effort in Eric> this project. So far you have only been irritating developers for no reason. What I asked you to do is to NOT change whatever config options developers developers felt were necessary to introduce. If you want to change the format of the config.in files go ahead. Messing around with the config options themselves is *not* for you to do, nor are you to impose a more restrictive space for people to work in. Jes