gnu-arch-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Roadmap Draft (the anticipated part 3)


From: James Blackwell
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Roadmap Draft (the anticipated part 3)
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 00:50:54 -0400

>> From: address@hidden (James Blackwell)
>> But while we're on the subject of "submission branches", I think they're
>> a bad idea. Sure, "submission branches" make your job a lot easier. Did
>> you stop to consider whether "submission branches" make the work of
>> submitters easier or more difficult? 
>

Then Tom Lord wrote:
> Stopped, considered, and made feature plans to make sure that it'll be
> easy.


Yes; there is ongoing discusion in this area, but consensus hasn't been
reached.

>     > I've tried "submission branches" and in my experience they're a pain in
>     > the rear. I personally suspect that you're pushing "submission branches"
>     > as a political tool to discourage diverging (and eventually forking)
>     > branches. What better way to control development, then to encourage
>     > submitters to keep their patches scattered around in different branches?
>     > That way, patches aren't concentrated into development trees that pose a
>     > potential threat to tla (a.k.a. "Tom Lord's Arch"). 
>
> You are wrong and are being rude.

No, I am not wrong. That is exactly what I suspect. I also don't think
I'm being rude. 

I would be more than willing to listen to any rational argument that
proves my suspicions are unfounded.


Tom Lord wrote:
>> > Save those thoughts for the individual threads they'll be relevent in.

Then yours truly (James Blackwell) wrote:
>> Pardon? Are you telling me what to think when?
 
Then Tom Lord replied:
> Um...  no.  I'm saying that if you want me to consider those points in
> detail you should remember them until it's closer to the time to work
> on those details.
>

Sure, I'd like for you to consider them, as you're the current arch
project lead. After all, my post was in direct response to _your_ post!

Even if you don't consider the ideas, they may still be relevant,
particularly if a consensus is reached. For example, they could be used
by the next arch project lead.

You're not trying to submarine me, are you?

-- 
James Blackwell          Try something fun: For the next 24 hours, give
Smile more!              each person you meet a compliment!

GnuPG (ID 06357400) AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D  247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]