From owner-freebsd-current Tue Sep 17 04:15:16 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA27685 for current-outgoing; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 04:15:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eel.dataplex.net (eel.dataplex.net [208.2.87.2]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA27680 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 04:15:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [208.2.87.4] (cod [208.2.87.4]) by eel.dataplex.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA18931; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 06:15:06 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender: rkw@eel.dataplex.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 06:15:06 -0500 To: Steven Wallace From: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) Subject: Re: Object directory changes to make Cc: current@freebsd.org Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >Fine! If you want to write a rule template thing, go ahead. >Consider my changes to be the "default rule". No. Although I support the idea of cleaning up the code, I do not support adding anything to the "default" action. It is bad enough that we need to support <...>., <...>/obj, and <...>/. There is no reason to add to that list. The problem with your attitude is that it builds even more unnecessary "legacy" baggage. There is no reason for me to have to support your changes as the default. You are not adding any functionality above that which my model handles. A more general solution is superior and no more difficult to implement. Unless you have a solution that handles my case as well as your own, I think that we should stay with the status quo. I consider that your changes introduce an unnecessary "wart" and wish to remove it before it becomes an entrenched item which has to be supported.