Re: busybox vs busybox-cvs?
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 10:52:09AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Op vr 17-10-2003, om 10:07 schreef Bastian Blank:
> > On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 08:25:57PM -0600, Erik Andersen wrote:
> > > > go away
> > > I think I must have missed the rest of this conversation...
> >
> > he criticise many of the fundamental changes i implement within the last
> > months.
>
> So what? That's probably because he's concerned about debian-installer,
> and wants it to become a better thing than boot-floppies (no, I'm not
> saying you don't want that). If you implement numerous fundamental
> changes without consulting this mailinglist, the error is yours, not
> his. If he gives feedback on changes you made, you shouldn't see them as
> critique, but as peer review. That's an important part of the free/open
> software world.
Joey has been helping intensively for the last few weeks, (thanks!)
while Bastian has been helping actively for the past several months
(thanks, too!). I thought it was probably a little off the mark to lob
"quit checking in broken code" out there. Which of us has never made a
mistake? I wonder how many commits Bastian has made on d-i vs. Joey.
Also, Joey wasn't here for the thorough bloat removal that Bastian
just did with libd-i. So his remarks about bloat, coupled with the
inference that it's somehow Bastian's intention to have bloated code
(and hey! we're talking about ONE k, folks!) just rubbed Bastian the
wrong way.
And, since I don't do any coding, just help with the list, I wouldn't
even have known about all the effort Bastian put in regarding libd-i
except for reading about functions that were getting thrown out, on
the list.
Why am I writing this? Because I've heard enough from Bastian to know
that he knows very little English, and for that reason if no other, I
think it's not fair to browbeat him on the list. Just stick to what's
wrong with the code, not what's wrong with the coder.
--
Debian GNU/Linux Operating System
By the People, For the People
Chris Tillman (a people instance)
toff one at cox dot net
Reply to: