On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Scott James Remnant <sc...@netsplit.com> wrote: > On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 09:11 +0200, Kees Jongenburger wrote: > >> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Scott James Remnant <sc...@netsplit.com> >> wrote: >> > On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 22:20 +0200, Kees Jongenburger wrote: >> >> > Hardly "did not get any feed-back" >> >> and True again. Call it a compatibility problem the report was /is an >> >> official way of stating that problem. and there is no response. >> >> >> > What kind of a response are you expecting? >> >> Thanks for the report. "This is a known issue" or "we where not aware >> of this issue". The problem >> is caused by the event driven nature of the system. "To resolve this >> issue we need to create a in memory >> structure that describes the dependencies" or "We don't know yet how >> to fix this issue". >> > You had exactly this response. Frankly, I don't know what you're > complaining about!
No it's not clear if you want those issues to be addressed in the next generation. > >> My goal is not to bash and I am willing to put some effort (as I did) >> in fixing such issue but I need at least >> some guidance into how you want it fixed. >> > How I want it fixed? You're the one who wants it fixed ;) Sure, but if possible I want to get my fix mainstream. That is why I care how you would like to see it solved or just some guidance to the problem found. Going back to the original subject of the thread and as all the code is yours. Will you accept fixes in 0.5.x or should be not bother you with these problems and find other solutions? Greetings > > Scott > -- > Have you ever, ever felt like this? > Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist? > -- upstart-devel mailing list upstart-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/upstart-devel
