On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Jens David wrote:
> My future plans are the following:
> I will mostly rework the complete packages. There is a lot of conceptionally
> wrong stuff in there like dependencies on the stupid axports file and
> /proc/*-Entries.
>
> Also, I will remerge ax25-tools and -apps (I do not see the reason to have
> two packages here) and call the resulting package ax25-utils again. The
> library will have to be completely reworked, too. I do not like those
> proc-scanning functions and axports stuff at all. I think I am going to
> call this libax25-2, but I�m not yet completely sure about this.
Oh, how nice of you to discuss all of this with the other developers and
giving constructive critisism/feedback to those of us who have written the
old code!
The /proc reading stuff was somethign I hacked quickly together to support
node. I don't think anyone else uses it. Would you care to elaborate on
what exactly is so evil about that.
> I know that this will pose a lot of administrative problems. But I will
> not accept any performance-compatibility tradeoffs here, except perhaps
> the binary compatibility with the old socket interface.
>
> Comments?
Good luck getting other developers interested in your (apprently personal)
crusade to save us from the evil of the old implementation.
> Remember the flexnet slogan?: "It�s like re-inventing the wheel, and doing
> it the right way this time."
Are you referring to "doing everything under secrecy and without
discussing with others" when you talk about the "right way" � la Flexnet?
Give us a break...
--
Tomi Manninen Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OH2BNS AX.25: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
KP20ME04 Amprnet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
