On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 10:35:13AM -0400, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 12:11:36AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > It's not what the hack does that matters, it's the quality of it. If
> > you don't leave time for it to be tested, there's no way I'm going to
> > have faith in it.
> Have you read what I was talking about? The code is the original
> ipchains Linux code, I would not going to touch that with a pole.
> The issue is only about glue code (passing through the ioctl), and
> you can tell if that works. It works if it works.
I've had too many examples of people (myself included) looking at the
code and being absolutely sure something will work obviously, and then
being proven wrong. I don't like taking those sorts of risks at the best
of times. When the thing being risked is the suitability for release of
an entire architecture, I'm not willing to risk it.
> You know, considering that I am working on and with this system for
> over three years now, one could think you would have a bit of faith
> in what I am saying about it, or check yourself.
Sure. I've no real belief it'll happen any way other than how you say. I'm
not willing to risk that both of us are wrong, though.
> > It is *irrelevant* what it looks like. It needs time to be tested. Time
> > which it won't get if it's left until marginally before the next release.
> Yeah, well, but things have to be done in proper order.
Yes. Implement. Then test. Then release.
> > And if you do that, you'll find you've left it too late, and that there's
> > not enough time to put together a usable firewalling tool. I'm not sure
> > what you're not getting about that. If you leave it 'til the last minute,
> > you'll be twiddling your thumbs for yet another year.
> That's what you think.
I've been doing this for two years. You might like to show a little
faith too.
> > So much for the benefits of being able to develop everything in userspace,
> > eh?
> In case you didn't notice, the problem is the same in Linux. It's just
> that everyone has given up hope that Linux kernel provide a sane and
> compatible external interface to the user.
Actually, it's that everyone's found the Linux kernel does provide a sane
and stable external interface.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``BAM! Science triumphs again!''
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif
Attachment:
pgpPa04Wv7On1.pgp
Description: PGP signature