Randy McMurchy wrote:
However, if there is a chance that the Cross-LFS stuff can/will/should/might be/whatever the official "LFS product", then folks should be able to discuss things and recommend/suggest changes, starting now.
I can see your point - public interest, ideas and discussion often lead to very good results. So if the LFS community on the whole can learn to discuss things better together we might see some good things happen.
On the other hand, Jim has been working on cross-lfs publicly with result being that anyone who wants can follow his work via the lfs-book list, test the builds themselves and offer comments or suggestions. It's not like there's ever really been closed development.
So on that level, I'm not really sure I'm seeing what you're finding fault with. Should Jim ask for permission to make a change on a book that only until recently he was sure was producing a sane build? Our goal up to this point was just to get the thing working. If anyone at any time wanted to know more details on why a specific change was made, they could have very easily replied to the change on lfs-book, or emailed Jim personally.
-- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
