[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Intent to hijack Bacula (Heads up, Get The Facts!) (long)

* Turbo Fredriksson (turbo@debian.org) wrote:
> You keep saying that, without showing the problems. From what I can see,
> all you say is "it's wrong", "it's very wrong" and "there's major problems with it".

John pointed out the issues to it earlier in this thread, which you said
you had followed so I expected you to be familiar with his complaints
already..  I also asked you to *look* at the new build system he's
using instead of making assumptions about it.

> I (and more) have stated that the previos (and now yours?) build system was
> WAY to expensive. Improving things, for whatever reason, is a good thing.

It's certainly not too expensive for our users.  It's not even too
expensive for our buildds.

> You on the other hand, went the OTHER way, you WORSENED the build.

I wish I could take credit for it, but John is the one doing all the
improvements to bacula.

> And throwing CPU time out the window with the excuse "if you can't keep up,
> get out" is in _MY_ opinion STUPID.

That's nice, but maintainability is more important that the speed of the
build.  The prior build system wasn't maintainable and was clearly
rather fragile.

> The ONLY problem with the current (partial) build system is that part of (!!)
> the build is hardcoded. Where libs are, and the name of the MySQL/PgSQL libs
> will rarely (if ever) change so this is not a PROBLEM, it's only a 'nitpicking'.

Which makes it fragile and much more difficult to maintain than it has
any need or right to be.  This also makes it more difficult on anyone
else having to use or deal with the packaging including porters, the
secruity team, and others.  That's not acceptable when all it does is
speed things up a bit.

Please, go look at John's build system and *try it* before complaining
that it's too slow.  It's also certainly not out of the question to work
with upstream to improve the speed of building for multiple subsystems
*without* having to resort to hard-codeing things into the build system.
Work *with* the upstream build system, don't try to hack around it.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: