On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:49:37PM +0800, Bean wrote: > Hi, > > This patch implement a new object format, the advantages are:
Hi Bean, Last time this was discussed [1], there was no consensus that we should switch to a new object format. Furthermore, Marco had some objections: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2009-07/msg00101.html and I'm growing increasingly worried about this tendency. Just about every week we have to discuss a proposal that significantly affects core functionality, which may later be implemented and sent as a patch no matter what we have discussed, and if left unattended, merged in SVN, and afterwards we and our users have and additional burden of finding new bugs and fixing them. I agree that we have a problem due to lack of leadership, but this is not acceptable. Marco is busy right now (traveling), so please put this on hold untill he's back, then we can discuss it. Don't take me wrong, Bean I really appreciate your contribution to GRUB, but you see it as an experimentation ground, and GRUB is not a research project. PUPA was, but GRUB aims to be a stable bootloader. [1] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2009-07/msg00098.html -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all." _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
