On 22 October 2010 10:28, Hans-Peter Diettrich <drdiettri...@aol.com> wrote: > Henry Vermaak schrieb: > >> Oh wow, so you want to change the parser because it "sounds" nice to you? >> >> Seriously, if this work was done more co-operatively with the fpc >> team, it may have made it. But I think it is too ambitious in the >> first place. > > All my projects are ambitious, because I prefer to spend my restricted > manpower on such topics, that can not be done easily by everybody else. > >> Some people maintain patch quilts for ages before it >> makes it into the kernel, for example. > > That's one of the reasons for a fork, I'm tired to wait for the time that > any part of my work will be accepted by other developers. The best way seems > to demonstrate the impact of my ideas, be negative or positive, and let the > FPC developers decide which parts to cherry-pick from the fork.
For that we don't need forks. You don't fork a large project when you want to implement a contentious feature that's going to take a while to mature and prove itself. This is what branches are for. Unfortunately you think the fpc team will merge your branch before it is useful. Good luck with the fork. _______________________________________________ fpc-other maillist - fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other
