Greg Schafer wrote: Jim Gifford wrote: Randy McMurchy wrote: and a whole lot of others wrote ... some stuff.
But the point is that without Jim's efforts there would not be a Cross-LFS branch. To a large degree it's 'Jim's Branch'. (Ryan's ideas, maybe some from Greg too, but Jim actually (mostly) did the branch.) To criticise him for his methods seems to me to be extremely rude of the lot of you. Now, it's quite a different matter to (1) use IRC to discuss a private branch, that might just become official in the far future, and (2) to use IRC to decide book policy. (1) is to be encouraged, since speed is of the essence. But using IRC for Trunk development (2) is deplorable, for reasons often cited: 1) Time zones. 2) Dial-up costs. 3) Lack of adequate records. 4) Irrelevant interjection. 5) We don't all type as fast as you. 6) Cultural bias. 7) Languages (I can read and write French, German and Romaji-Japanese, slooooowly! so I can do email, but not irc in those languages - for others the same is true of English) So in my view: Use IRC for branch development UP TO the point it becomes TRUNK (i.e. long before Testing). Then never use IRC again for development, just discussion. Any relevant discussion on IRC MUST be logged and the log published with due time (24 hours?) for list discussion before any (significant) commits are made. R. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
