On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Michael Mol <mike...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Mick <michaelkintz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wednesday 14 Sep 2011 11:25:23 Alan Mackenzie wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 05:10:40PM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: >>> > > Is it simply subscribing to -dev and voicing the conversation there? >>> > >>> > Of course not. But please, do that if you think it will help to steer >>> > Gentoo to whatever direction do you think is the correct one. >>> > Personaly I don't think the devs (who, AFAIK, do not receive a single >>> > dime for working on Gentoo) will appreciate anybody telling them how >>> > they should do their jobs, the one they do for free. But that's just >>> > me. >>> >>> I think so. Most devs are grateful for (polite) feedback, and take it >>> into account when doing their work. I suspect they're unaware of just >>> how much this change to booting is disliked by Gentoo users. >> >> Could someone please nudge them this way for them to get first hand feedback >> on their decision. >> >> >>> > No, by "you know what needs to be done" I mean: code. Contribute. >>> > Become a developer. Make shit happens the way you think it should >>> > happen. >>> > >>> > Shut up and code. Google it, I didn't come with the phrase. >> >> Not all of us have the capability to code, although all of us are grateful >> for >> good code devs produce and often express our user needs and wants in this >> M/L. >> >> >>> Just as a matter of interest, how much coding have you done for open >>> source or free software? It was conspicuously absent from the CV you >>> posted here a few days ago. >> >> Canek may wish to keep his reply off list because it wouldn't be of >> particular >> interest to many and is not relevant with Gentoo being aligned with a flawed >> (IMHO) design principle. >> >> Better we focus our efforts instead on influencing Gentoo devs and upstream >> decision making on this matter before it defaults into a design orthodoxy for >> Linux. > > Rather than flooding the gentoo devs with a bunch of outrage, maybe > it'd be better to build a document detailing the reasoning of the > opinions and discussed potential solutions? It'd probably be received > a lot better than starting over with a new heated argument, feeling > around how much the various parties know and understand about the > issue.
Please, somebody do that. Then the users (like me) who support the changes could make another document arguing point by point your document. That will centralize the reasons for and against the proposed changes, so it would help people to better understand the issue. Maybe some developers for the change will change their mind. And maybe some of the developers against it will change theirs. And in the end, whoever wants to actually write the code and implement the idea (any idea) will, you know, write the code and implement the idea. For sure this proposal for a document for the developers would help to clear the air with regards of how "aware" or "unaware" they are. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
