On Thursday, March 16, 2006 09:47:18 AM +0100 Rainer Toebbicke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I showed you what the problem is and how one could fix it, done so in numerous occasions in the past. As explained, afsutil.h looked attractive as it leaves the option open to switch everything to afs_inet_ntoa() with a simple #define. More earth to earth: it involves patching only 1 rather stable file, which suits somebody who routinely has ~30 patches to apply to every AFS version before it can go production. You can do better? Applause! Exaltation! Hurrah... do it, please!
Oh, come on. It's perfectly reasonable to discuss possible approaches to a problem in an open forum. And it's entirely reasonable to have coding standards, and discuss what they should be, and require that submitted patches conform to them.
For the record, I don't set policy for OpenAFS, and I don't decide what patches to accept. I do push really hard on the gatekeepers when I think they're about to do (or have done) something I think is stupid. Sometimes it works; sometimes Derrick puts his fingers in his ears and sticks out his tongue at me. :-)
If you have a patch, send it to -bugs. I'm sure the gatekeepers will do whatever they think is appropriate.
As for your other 30 patches or so, what are they? Bug fixes? Local enhancements? Things that can/should go upstream? I haven't had that many local patches to AFS in several years; I'm curious what you're doing differently.
-- Jeff _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
