Date: 05 Sep 1996 13:09:05 +0100 From: Paul Richards <p.richards@elsevier.co.uk> To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth), current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Latest Current build failure Message-ID: <57buflxixq.fsf@elsevier.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Nate Williams's message of Wed, 4 Sep 1996 21:17:00 -0600 (MDT) References: <v02140b02ae53a4a2fce7@[208.2.87.4]> <5412.841891920@time.cdrom.com> <199609050317.VAA03865@rocky.mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> writes: > Case in point. > > SUP is a 'good' distribution tool. However, we all admit that it had > flaws. Enter John Polstra. Following the *exact* procedure above, he > implemented CVSup, tested it, and then presented it to Jordan and a few > other developers. Not everyone likes to work this way. Some people are happy to spend their time working on their pet projects regardless of whether they ever get adopted or not. Others prefer to discuss proposals up front and see if there's interest in the idea before wasting their time on a solution that no-one's ever going to be interested in. The build system is so complex that it makes sense to me to get feedback from all possible users about what a "new" solution should look like. If people don't want to contribute to that discussion then they can just hit the delete key instead of trying to kill off the thread. -- Paul Richards. Originative Solutions Ltd. (Netcraft Ltd. contractor) Elsevier Science TIS online journal project. Email: p.richards@elsevier.co.uk Phone: 0370 462071 (Mobile), +44 (0)1865 843155
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?57buflxixq.fsf>