2009/9/18 Alan Grimes <[email protected]>: > William Leslie wrote: >> This list is addictive in a bad way; and I should probably stay clear >> of it. It seems to mostly be assertions about what the project should >> be by people who have no interest in contributing, and even less >> interest in reading the archives or even the wiki, which clearly >> outlines the issues in the various kernels that the developers had to >> deal with along the way. > > Link plz.
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd/ng.html >> It is probably the case that the lead engineers, with decades of >> experience developing the software that you probably haven't even read >> the wiki for, are a lot smarter than you, know what the current issues >> are, and better understand how to get there. Making statements for >> which the rebuttal is in the wiki will not make you seem particularly >> insightful. Attempted drive-by enlightenings benefit nobody. > > Crusty old engineers, as a rule, have forgotten more than they know. > They don't know the current best practices, nor do they have much (or > any) appreciation for what the user community actually requires. In the absence of people suddenly joining and submitting patches regularly, I'd say that they *are* the user community in this case! > For the record, I got into operating systems in 1994 and abandoned my > project around 2004. So I'm not, by any means, a drive-by critic. If > such records exist, the date I joined this list should also be of interest. Apologies, it was five in the morning and I took some code-induced frustration out. It probably wasn't a good idea.
