Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 17:58:17 -0700 (MST) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), rkw@dataplex.net, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Message-ID: <199611220058.RAA13484@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199611220034.RAA14461@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <199611212141.OAA12035@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199611220034.RAA14461@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > There is too much "damage control" and too little "consideration" taking > > > place for an unbiased conclusion that what Richard volunteered to do > > > "wasn't what needed to be done". > > > > Richard was completely free to do what he wanted to do, but he wasn't > > going to get the 'blessing' of anyone until he had a working prototype > > that was at least as good as the current system. > > I don't think that was the problem. That was *the* problem, and I was one of the most prolific posters. > What he was looking for was a commitment that, if there was consensus > that the prototype was "at least as good as the current system", then > the existing system would be replaced. You get that *after* you've proven your point, not before. That's the way things work. Because one person's 'solution' may meet all the technical criteria (ie; it solves the problem) doesn't mean it meets all the criteria (is this *better* than the current system). I won't buy off on *anything* simply because there is no such thing as 'completely technical' solution that have no politics/emotions/personal judgement involved. Richard may think he solution is 'easier/better/cleaner', but since I'm one of the users responsible for using it I leave it up to *MY* judgement to determine that. If he doesn't like my opinion, he can bring it up with someone else, etc... As a 'committer' I'm responsible for the code in the tree, and responsible to both users and developers. I don't take that responsibility lightly, and as such you should be commending the committers for trying to maintain some semblance of 'consistancy' in the tree rather than beating them over the head for doing their job. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611220058.RAA13484>