Hi, On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Arnaud, > > On 23.11.2010 18:36, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: >> Hi, >> [I will comment only on the Linux interface part, commenting on the >> rest being pointless.] >> > I am very happy that you agree with the rest of my mail and I am so glad > that you realized that my points about forking are so profound that no > further comments were warranted. This praise from you definitely > brightened my day. > Quite the opposite. I totally object to what you said. All the point of Free Software is the ability to fork projects; having an ecosystem and competition is sane. Note that I don't judge the quality of the fork, which is often lowered as the new developer has less knowledge on the code than the original developer.
The problem with Coccinelle is that its field, its implementation, even the language it's written into, require really non-standard and non-trivial knowledge. Coupled with the lack of available information, beside research papers, this makes it really hard for external contribution to happen. >> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: >> Please, point me a single commit in Linux tree saying: "Change >> interface FUU to make BAR's life a hell supporting their fork". Linux >> internal interfaces are changed for technical reason, not to make >> outside developer's life a hell. > > The net effect is the same. And here is what Greg Kroah-Hartman says > about this: > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=119341446007202 > Let me quote from Greg's mail: > "Read Documentation/stable_api_nonsense.txt for how we already make > out-of-tree code developer's lives hell :)" > Exactly my point. There is a huge gap between "I'll make you life a hell just because I want to" and "I just don't care about your fork". - Arnaud _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci (Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
