Re: GGI ;o) (Was: Re: Boot Logo Thoughts (LONG))

Richard Gooch (Richard.Gooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU)
Sun, 17 May 1998 01:18:46 +1000

Mike A. Harris writes:
> On Sat, 16 May 1998, Richard Gooch wrote:
> > > > On another note, why do we build gzip into kernel images when something
> > > > like bzip2 has come along?
> > >
> > > Oh, no!!! Not *this* flame-war again! Do we have to touch *every* old
> > > stomping-ground this week?
> >
> > Looks like it :-( I'm surprised we haven't seen GGI start up again.
> Why? Whats wrong with GGI?????!?!?!!!?!?! ;o)
> I just downloaded the latest GGI snapshot, and it is cool! ;o)

I have no problem with GGI. My problem is with people who start long
threads (which degenerate into flamewars) about GGI. The GGI team has
said they're not ready yet to submit their code to Linus, yet every
time the GGI thread starts up again people whine about "pretty please,
let's have GGI in the kernel *NOW*, it's the best thing since sliced
bread, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera".
Once the GGI team submit their code, serious discussion about the pros
and cons can begin. Before that leave them in peace to deliver the
goods. Premature activism on "behalf" of GGI is in fact detrimental,
as it can entrench opposition to it. Some of this opposition is due to
some of the major players in Linux having been unimpressed by an older
version of GGI, and some is due to the excessive proselytising of the
GGI cause.

Note: I'm not accusing you of anything, I'm just pointing out my
observations of past GGI threads.



To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to