I have to support Jens since I think nex-Ax25 support is much better (and
what is done so far greatly proves that).
Have in mind we're talking about Ax25 for 2.5/2.6 kernels .. (or patched
2.2/2.4 of course) so compatibility issues are not that important.
On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Tomi Manninen OH2BNS wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Jens David wrote:
>
> > Also, I will remerge ax25-tools and -apps (I do not see the reason to have
> > two packages here) and call the resulting package ax25-utils again. The
> > library will have to be completely reworked, too. I do not like those
> > proc-scanning functions and axports stuff at all. I think I am going to
> > call this libax25-2, but I´m not yet completely sure about this.
>
> Oh, how nice of you to discuss all of this with the other developers and
> giving constructive critisism/feedback to those of us who have written the
> old code!
Some developers talk, some actually develop something .. :)
(just my opinion about new-ax25 discussion ..
don't take personaly (anyone))
And well.. if you want to give feedback .. just do it now!
This is why new versions are released, don't you think ?
> The /proc reading stuff was somethign I hacked quickly together to support
> node. I don't think anyone else uses it. Would you care to elaborate on
> what exactly is so evil about that.
Someone was asking here what is so conceptionally wrong about old-ax25
.. so just one example ..
> > I know that this will pose a lot of administrative problems. But I will
> > not accept any performance-compatibility tradeoffs here, except perhaps
> > the binary compatibility with the old socket interface.
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Good luck getting other developers interested in your (apprently personal)
> crusade to save us from the evil of the old implementation.
Oh .. should we do it like Win95 ? (DOS compatibility)
Old implementation is working but that's just about all to tell about it.
If new-implementation was only frame-collector and adaptive timers it
would be better .. and new implementation is much more than that ..
> > Remember the flexnet slogan?: "It´s like re-inventing the wheel, and doing
> > it the right way this time."
>
> Are you referring to "doing everything under secrecy and without
> discussing with others" when you talk about the "right way" á la Flexnet?
> Give us a break...
"secrecy" .. oh ..
Sources and docs are freely available .. so what is so "secret" for you ?
What I see is just ranting about new-ax25 but I don't see
(have overlooked ?) those people actually trying new-ax25.
BTW: FlexNet just _IS_ the best concerning channel acces algorithms /
adaptive timers / routing.
It is NOT good its authors don't like opensource and it seems they don't
like Linux too.
And it does not allow users to set parametrs but after some years on PR I
exactly understand why .. there are just too much people who have special
ability to misconfigure anything ..
I'm getting feeling that people ranting about FlexNet etc. have never seen
something better than BPQ node ..
Jan
