To put it bluntly, my central motivation for anything is none of anyone's business, and discussing my goals and focuses---instead of your disagreement with me---is one of the more pointless things you could do here.
I strongly disagree with this statement. Discussing and questioning motivations, goals and focuses in an integral part of the debate. The codebase of HelenOS, as an open-ended software system still quite far from being a drop-in replacement for anything, is not only about the ends, but also about the means.
Of course, technically it is of no-one's business to tell you how to spend your time. But I guess you don't want to spend your time on something that won't be accepted in the end. Discussing motivations and having an agreement on the goals and focuses can improve the likelihood of having an agreement on the code, too.
There should be some kind of discussion guideline, like "If you disagree with someone, be relevant to the question at hand, and don't try to prove the question itself unjustified by appealing to his motives".
I also disagree here. Such a guideline is applicable to objective, quantitative criteria such as code correctness, performance, etc. But most of the discussion we have here recently is about subjective and qualitative criteria such as software architecture.
It is relevant to ask for the motives of proposed changes if they don't demonstrably fix a bug or improve performance, but only _subjectively_ improve the code.
M.D. _______________________________________________ HelenOS-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.modry.cz/listinfo/helenos-devel
