On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, Tim Mooney wrote:

> I agree that would be the best solution, but I'm afraid it's not that
> easy.  I've submitted quite a few very small portability patches against
> ORBit from as far back as the 0.3.X days, and virtually every one of my
> patches has been rejected.  I've had very good luck getting portability
> patches accepted and integrated into all the other gnome components I've
> tackled, but not ORBit.  I'm not alone, either.  I've spoken with another
> person that's had much the same experience, though I think they were more
> tenacious than I was, and after quite a bit of arguing they did get some
> of their patches integrated into CVS.

Hm.  Is there some sort of rationale behind the rejection of these
patches?  I mean, as much as I would like to defend gnome (and especially,
their use of CORBA), when looking at ORBit, even a cursory glance reveals
gccisms and unnecessary dependencies...

Perhaps a letter-writing campaign from people who can't get ORBit to
compile on other platforms would be good (provided there still exist
portability patches that are current and don't break anything too
important) to show the ORBit people that this is actually an important

Even if you can deceive people about a product through misleading statements,
sooner or later the product will speak for itself.
- Hajime Karatsu

Reply via email to