On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 04:35:41AM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Oleg Verych wrote: > > > Today's kconfig was proposed and accepted in a very unpleasant > > circumstances, has very poor design, development and no working > > alternative (for 5+ years now). > > If you want to make such statements, you have to offer a little more than > the hot air you're producing right now... ...
> If you want to improve the design, you're more than welcome. I'm the first > one to admit that there's still lots of room for improvement, but if you > want to claim this can only be done via a rewrite, then you have to be > a lot more specific what's wrong the current design and why it's > unfixable. > Quite some thought has been put into this design and if you were a little > more specific, I could actually tell you why it is this way and maybe how > to improve it incrementally instead of trying to reinvent everything. Thanks. I will be specific, after i will finish, what i already have, to make air a bit less hot. Of course everything will be back compatible, so nothing to worry about (the rewrite). ____ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
