John Plocher writes:
> IMHO, the conversations here should be less like "I don't like that
> idea, and here is why it is bad" and more like "Interesting - how
> can we together help you make this a successful part of our OS?".

The idea I don't like is having a _separate_ libast that provides an
enhanced stdio experience.

How many of those should we have?  Is two stdios enough, or should we
have seven?  Why not build all our utilities atop NSPR?

I have no problem seeing that libast has good stuff in it.  I'm not
trying to debate that question at all.  Instead, since it's good, I'd
like to see how it gets integrated into Solaris itself, rather than
just bolted on the side.

These sorts of forks are _not_ zero-cost experiments that we can just
foist off on the product.  Consider what happens when different
layered libraries start targeting separate underlying and different
stdio enhancements -- how does an application deal with mutually
incompatible architectural directions?

> There is a lot of good thought that has gone into the AST stuff; so
> much so that it is surprising to me that your initial reaction is so
> NIH flavored.

NIH has nothing to do with it.  I think you're misreading my response.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive         71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-code mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code

Reply via email to