On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 09:32:34PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > > I think that is exactly the opposite of the direction wbx wanted it > to go. On the other hand, now that he has no use case, he’ll probably > not veto it. > > My concerns are: it makes maintenance a nightmare. It's already bad > enough. We have too many packages, too many knobs. Compare busybox > in 1.0 vs trunk. (The user can still manipulate its configuration, > but we won't support it.) >
This is true, I think. Maybe it is better to not let the 'end-user' of the ADK use the kconfig but the developer, who changes kernel packages and parameters. It would make the initial configuration build process for the kernel much more easy, I think. > I think you used too much Gentoo :D > Yes, Gentoo is nice ;-). And it is even working quite good. But I think, we can not compare FreeWRT and it's number of developers to Gentoo ... > Note that neither my interpretation of wbx’ will nor my own concerns > should have any influence on the decision, but I’d like them to be > included during discussion. Ack. Clemens _______________________________________________ freewrt-developers mailing list [email protected] https://www.freewrt.org/lists/listinfo/freewrt-developers
