From: Simo Sorce idra@samba.org
You don't understand that you can't force volunteers to do something. If you want to see something, you've to do it yourself.
You don't understand that it does not make sense to to it yourself because the maintainers will not use your patches!
You ARE wrong! I personally applied many patches to samba from others!
Then you are a much better maintainer than the ones I have been in contact with....
I started to do this once with Linux and the /dev/sg* driver and I failed miserably because Alan Cox decided not to use my enhanced driver.
Probably because it was poorely coded from Alan point of view, they are very selective and you took the worst project on the world (from this point of view) to make patches against.
Sorry, but my patch was definitely better than the original code and in contrary to the typical Linux behavior planned for forward AND Backward compatibility.
The reason that Alan did not use my patch was that somebody else did work on things that Alan believed that it would be needed although it was a lower priority from a SCSI user.
hmm I think you are wrong again here, my experience with samba tell me so. We use GNU make and I see no multi platform problems (take a look to http://build.samba.org to see how many different platfroms works ok! They are not all the platforms samba runs on, but only the platforms we have currently available in the build farm)
Did you ever have a closer look at my makefile system?
It is really bad that people critisize it but do not even read the basic information.
He mean that your inclusion features are not included in GNU make because nobody need them, and you do not want to contribute code to make GNU make better.
Wrong: I need them,
I do not want to say that GNU make is very good or that you should not use smake, if you are ok with smake I'm too, it's your choice, you are the developer, but generally in free software world, if you want to see a feature added to a program (GNU make) you either make a patch your self or contact the mainteiner and convince him it is a needed feature so that he can add it by itself. If you do not take either ways, please at least do not shout on other people work, you already said "code do not speak" (about the Hurd), I would like to say the same to you.
Again: Why should I make a patch to GNU make when there is my smake?
Sorry, I don't have much knowledge about companies and software who only like to restric me. Solaris might be free beer then, who cares.
Well the authors of GDB restrict me because it is the only debugger available on Linux and because I cannot do the things I expect a debugger to do.
You have a vrey strange idea of restriction and freedom IMO !
Other people in thie mailing list too...
Work with people to improve GDB! If you do not care, please do not bother us telling to use proprietary debbugers, we will not do so!
Again: I don't have the time to do this because I work on my programs. If those people would ask me for help, I could give them how to improve GDB but I definitely don't have the time to do it myself. If GDB will become usable I will be happy, but meanwhile I use a better platfor: Solaris.
Jörg
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1 schilling@fokus.gmd.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix
FOKUS at CeBIT Hall 11, A14 - BerliOS at CeBIT Hall 11 D11 (Future Market)
Meet me at CeBIT in Hall 11 D11 on the BerliOS booth - www.berlios.de
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 03:38:39PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Again: Why should I make a patch to GNU make when there is my smake?
If smake is so great, why is nobody using it? It is not in Debian, so ~4500 free and non-free software packages don't use/need it.
Nobody ever asked me if we had smake in Debian GNU/Hurd.
And freshmeat says:
No screenshot 3. _smake A system to maintain, update, and regenerate programs.
Rating: (not rated) Vitality: 0.07% Popularity: 0.71%
vs:
No screenshot 12. GNU make Rating: 8.24/10.00 Vitality: 0.01% Popularity: 3.81%
Nobody ever even rated smake. It must be pretty dead software.
Sorry, couldn't resist. Marcus
Joerg Schilling wrote:
From: Simo Sorce idra@samba.org
You don't understand that you can't force volunteers to do something. If you want to see something, you've to do it yourself.
You don't understand that it does not make sense to to it yourself because the maintainers will not use your patches!
You ARE wrong! I personally applied many patches to samba from others!
Then you are a much better maintainer than the ones I have been in contact with....
Did it ever occur to you that this might be related to your style? If you constantly attack each and everything that comes to mind, and at the same time take any criticism of your statements as personal offense, it's rather hard to discuss anything with you constructively. (Of course, I don't know if your debates with those moderators were similar to this discussion, so my assumption may be wrong.)
hmm I think you are wrong again here, my experience with samba tell me so. We use GNU make and I see no multi platform problems (take a look to http://build.samba.org to see how many different platfroms works ok! They are not all the platforms samba runs on, but only the platforms we have currently available in the build farm)
Did you ever have a closer look at my makefile system?
It is really bad that people critisize it but do not even read the basic information.
That's a typical example of what I mean: He did not criticize your system. In fact, he does not even talk about your system in the quoted paragraph. He merely states that their system works for them to counter your unfounded claims that no system beside yours can possibly work.
It's you who permanently criticizes other systems, most of the time without giving concrete examples. Maybe you have some points, but without telling them, it's hard for us to see them. This way you can only convince people who share your views already.
Besides, it never helps if you take yourself too importantly. Sure, cdrecord is a nice program, but it's by far not the most important thing to do with a computer, c'mon now. By making such absurd claims, you only lose credibility and/or appear arrogant.
Frank