Arjan van de Ven writes:
> On Sun, 2002-10-13 at 18:11, Brian Jackson wrote:
>
>> p.s. Maybe you could keep your replies to constructive criticism, instead of
>> just dogging EVMS. Some people actually do want linux to improve.
>
> In case you missed is: EVMS is not the only way you can do volume
> management in 2.5... and Christoph is pointing out valid design flaws
> (and serious code bugs) in EVMS. Code bugs you can fix after merge;
> design flaws should at least be discussed before merging in my opinion.
>
Yes I do realize that, but I think EVMS offers more in the long run than any
of the others. I don't mean to speak ill of Christoph(he has done some very
good work in the past, and I think he is very talented), In fact, I thought
he handled the problems with EVMS very well at first(pointing out problems,
etc.), but then as the thread went on you could tell he was just taking it
more and more personally(for whatever reasons), and we all know that doesn't
help getting things done, especially not with a deadline looming. I don't
know as much as I should about all of this considering I am opening my mouth
on the subject, but it seems that something needs to be done soon one way or
another.
--Brian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 15 2002 - 22:00:46 EST