Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 22:32:29 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@backplane.com> Cc: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>, committers@freebsd.org, jkh@time.cdrom.com Subject: Re: make.conf Message-ID: <461.904336349@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 28 Aug 1998 11:38:33 PDT." <199808281838.LAA19893@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I suppose we can hold off for a week or two. > > *OR* we can simply add the make.conf.local functionality, which was > what I wanted to do in the first place. Nice and neat, functinoal, > no skin off anyone's nose except maybe for a few purists. Matt, I'm one of those purists, and I would really appreciate if you would try to understand that having commit-bit doesn't allow you to implement "How the world should be according to >ME<" without the consensus of the committers group in general and -core in particular. There are good choices and bad choices, rectifying the bad ones may not be as trivial as they look. In general if they were they would have been fixed by now. Please do understand that this is not just your sandbox, there are a few hundred thousand people besides you who have to fit in this sandbox. Widen your perspective a bit... -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." "ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?461.904336349>