On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 01:12:49PM +0000, Evan Lloyd wrote:
> > whatsoever. If you introduce any library classes that abstract away
> > the differences between platforms, you can include a Null version of
> > such a library that simply does ASSERT (FALSE) in every function: this
>
> [[Evan Lloyd]] One could, indeed, do that. We, however, would be
> very reluctant to incur the overhead of rework in response to
> spurious cavils from a maintainer when it is of no direct relevance
> to us.
Rework is the expected norm for the first version of any patchset.
If that is not calculated into your schedules, you will continue to be
disappointed.
An open source project is not a scrapyard for proprietary code, it is
a collaborative environment where people and organisations work
together to achieve better results than they could hope for
individually.
Like these suggestions for rework are of no direct relevance to you,
your patches are of no direct relevance for the project - yet we have
taken the time to sit down, try to understand them, and give feedback
on how they could be improved to be of greater value to the community
as a whole.
I don't think I would be taking to hard a line if I suggest that you
apologise to Ard for your statement above.
Yes, we're all permitted to get annoyed and throw our toys out of the
pram from time to time, but personal attacks are not acceptable.
/
Leif
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
