From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 30 21:25:30 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B91B816A4CE; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 21:25:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED60F43D66; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 21:25:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i2V5PRsg007701; Wed, 31 Mar 2004 07:25:27 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) To: Alexey Zelkin From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 28 Mar 2004 12:40:48 +0300." <20040328094048.GA40406@phantom.cris.net> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 07:25:27 +0200 Message-ID: <7700.1080710727@critter.freebsd.dk> cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CFD: XMLification of NOTES X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 05:25:30 -0000 In message <20040328094048.GA40406@phantom.cris.net>, Alexey Zelkin writes: >hi, > >This weekend I have got some spare time (due to illness) and in order to get >some rest from current tasks decided to pass thru old TODO file. Most >interesting task got my attention was old item related to XMLification NOTES. > >Important advantage of this step (IMO) is to provide possibility to >check dependency/conflicts of kernel configuration file to end users. OK, I've held off saying my opinion on this, but here goes: We have three options on this: 1. We can recoil in horror and erect a stigma so large that nobody will ever again even think about this or dare go near this issue. That means we will lack a proper way of documenting dependencies and relationships in a way that can be used by a programatic frontend to kernel configuration. 2. We can say "The concept is actually sound, but lets see if we can find an even better way of doing it. That might actually move us forward on this issue, there is no guarantee that it will and more likely than not, it will not. 3. We can say, yeah, it is not perfect but it is a lot better than any thing we have seen, so by all means move on! That means that we move forward right now and that FreeBSD gets better and more userfriendly. IMO, unless somebody is willing to come up with a _better_ implementation now, Alexey should be allowed to move forward. So no, I don't particularly like XML, but I like the fact that somebody works on these kinds of issues, so Alexey have my full support to work on this, and if that means that XML is the format he settles on, then so be it. I don't want to see FreeBSD become a stagnant effort, and our kernel configuration tools could use a modernization which can make them more userfriendly to people who have not had 10 years experience with FreeBSD and who can remember all emails about kernel configuration discussions throughout the history of the project. Go for it Alexey! Poul-Henning -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.