Re: last call for GRUB maintainership
Gordon Matzigkeit <gord@fig.org> wrote:
> Erich, I'm writing to ask you to reconsider your official commitment
> to GRUB. This is a public letter, because it's the only way I've been
> able to get replies from you in the past. If you are simply busy, and
> can't answer, but you want to reply thoroughly, please tell me.
...
> I need you to understand that nobody is judging you for not doing much
> work on GRUB lately. We're just getting irritated because you *say*
> you'll do work, but then you don't.
OK. You clearly need turnaround time, and my schedule has been coopted
by other things that aren't worth going into here.
The main reasons I'm still interested, to be honest, is in:
-- making a bit of a re-write that uses sufficiently generic
mechanisms that real next-generation OSes are supported well.
(boot-time loading/probing for modules is probably the biggest
issue here).
-- making sure that a good and intuitive user interface/scripting
mechanism is used. For example, the suggestion of scheme as
a scripting language is NOT intuitive to the bulk of end-users,
and I don't think it ever will be, no matter how simple/elegant
it's syntax is. I'm still thinking about this one.
I've always felt that someone could go ahead and do what they want to
it and make their own thing.
If you want to go your separate way or want faster development, feel free.
--
Erich Stefan Boleyn \_ <erich@uruk.org>
Mad Scientist -- CyberMuffin \__ http://www.uruk.org/
Motto: "I'll live forever or die trying" ---------------------------
Reply to: