Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 27 Aug 1996 13:54:28 -0700
From:      "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
To:        rkw@shark.dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth)
Cc:        Paul Richards <p.richards@elsevier.co.uk>, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Am I wrong or is this just stupid?r 
Message-ID:  <1537.841179268@time.cdrom.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 27 Aug 1996 06:52:09 CDT." <v02140b04ae488b282b38@[208.2.87.4]> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The biggest problem that I have with doing ANYTHING to the "make" structure
> is that there is no concensus building. Anyone who proposes a change is
> immediately "shot down" by someone who refuses to allow progress if it
> means that he has to CHANGE anything about his favorite mode of operation.

You've consistently cited this as a problem and we've just as
consistently pushed back on it as a non-problem, asserting that the
main issue has nothing to do with fear of change and everything to do
with the LACK OF A WORKING PROTOTYPE TO EVALUATE.

Your reaction to this has always been "I'm not building a prototype
until everyone agrees in principle to adopt the idea, sight unseen,
and simply have FAITH that what I'm doing is the right thing, praise
the lawd!"

Well, faith might be cool when it comes to religion, but not in
engineering.  Nobody has ever disputed that the current make system is
full of holes you could drive a truck through, nor has there ever been
anything but 100% agreement that the whole tool interdependency issue
is badly handled and far from any conceivable ideal.  However, it
works and nobody is going to switch horses until given another WORKING
alternative.  Having the build system broken is simply an unacceptable
scenario since it stops just about everyone else from getting their
work done, not just those interested in conceptual elegance in a build
system.

You want to change this?  Good!  It needs changing!  You want to show
us a functioning prototype to react to, discuss and hopefully adopt?
Cool!  We'll be *more than happy* to look at it.  And if the words
"hopefully adopt" and "look at it" don't strike you as a strong enough
committment, do bear in mind that no greater committment CAN be made
without something more tangible to evaluate.  It's not personal, it's
simply no less than we'd expect from anyone else.

						Jordan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1537.841179268>