Re: Possible breakthrough in the CML2 logjam?

[Jeff Garzik]

"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
> Larry McVoy <[e-mail]>:
> > > I need you to tell Linus that your concerns have been met
> > > and sponsor CML2 to go in, so I can stop perpetually re-fighting old
> > > battles.
> >
> > That's a fine thing for anyone and everyone to say *after* they have
> > used the system and like it.
> >
> > If you are asking for a blessing in advance, which is how I read that,
> > I would think there is zero chance of that happening, it's not how work
> > is done on the kernel.
> 
> We're talking about design objections here.  Specific objections to actual
> CML2 bugs, including rulebase and UI bugs, are a different level.  What
> I am asking is if Jeff will bless the *architecture* provided the global-
> dependency issue is met.

Larry's right.  I won't (and notice, did not in previous e-mail) provide
a pre-blessing.  I will promise to be fair.

But as I said, let's wait a bit and see what others say.  Alan for
example noted that bit about improving the existing tools.

	Jeff

-- 
Jeff Garzik      | "Why is it that attractive girls like you
Building 1024    |  always seem to have a boyfriend?"
MandrakeSoft     | "Because I'm a nympho that owns a brewery?"
                 |             - BBC TV show "Coupling"