bdubbs at swbell.net
Thu Jul 15 08:40:40 PDT 2004
Jeroen Coumans wrote:
> Matthias B. said the following on 15-07-2004 13:29:
>> Don't tempt me :-) Or maybe DO tempt me. I might even start something
>> like this. I could at least write up a mission statement. Hmmm.
> I'd love to see one and I'd even offer to help write one. LFS really
> needs a clear mission statement to resolve the current conflicts. And
> if we can't seem to combine the functionalist/educationalist
> (/minimalist) approaches, perhaps an internal *) split would seem to
> be the wisest course of action.
> *) Internal meaning that both books would still be produced under the
> LFS flag and no forking would occur. This is based on the assumption
> that there is considerable overlap between both ideologies and that
> neither party has an interest in forking.
I don't agree. There still would be too much overlap. What differences
do you really see between your educationalist and your functionalist
approaches? I see the following possibilities:
2. boot scripts
1 actually influences 2 quite a bit.
The only real issue as I see it is to decide what goes in LFS and what
goes in BLFS.
More information about the lfs-dev