On Fri, 1 Jun 2007, Peter Memishian wrote:
>
> > I don't understand what the "problem" is with the way Roland has
> > implemented this? Is it a _big_ problem - or is is simply your
> > personal preference?
>
> Roger (cc'd on this email) is the right person to engage for the
> philosophical argument for it -- I am merely asking for consistency
> with the way the rest of our Makefiles work. The changes necessary
> to provide that consistency are minor and should take less than an
> hour (at most) to implement.
No - no more "philosophical argument"s - if you want to ask "for
consistency" - then make the bloody changes yourself. As I said - it
would take you less time to make the changes than to type a stupid
email requesting them.
If the project is good enough to integrate - then - step aside and let
it integrate. If there is a "philosophical argument" - then follow
your own procedures and file a bug report against ksh93 *after* it
integrates.
You're being obstructionist and blocking ksh93 integration. In my book
- you're either part of the problem or part of the solution. Where do
you want to be in terms of getting ksh93 integrated (rethorical
question - don't answer).
> Again, it is not about personal preference. It's about consistency and
> simplicity.
Disagree strongly. It's about people with more time on their hands to
write stupid emails and block forward progress.
I don't remember ever seeing an email from you that said "Hey Roland -
I saw I problem, I checked out the file and I fixed it. Now here is
why I did that".
Regards,
Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com
Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT
OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/
