My plans

Jeremy Utley jeremy at jutley.org
Wed May 12 18:17:03 PDT 2004


Jeroen Coumans wrote:

> Jeremy Utley said the following on 13-05-2004 02:16:
> >
>
>> Please remember, this "Separate tree" model is what *I* originally 
>> proposed, but was rejected by THE COMMUNITY entirely, in favor of 
>> doing the work we were doing in HEAD.  Now, we're doing things as the 
>> community wanted, and being criticized for them by the community.
>
>
> I don't speak for the community but only for myself; any criticism is 
> mine. If I rejected the seperate tree model, it was a mistake and 
> based on a misunderstanding of it on my part.
>
All those of us who were involved with BE-LFS was the ability to do our 
own thing, without having to fight the community every step of the way, 
and to make that information easily accessible to others.  And by easily 
accessible, I mean everything in one place, step by step, something that 
a hint or a wiki doesn't allow for.  Most of doing BE-LFS came from my 
frustration in building systems with NPTL, having to have both the LFS 
book, and the NPTL hint open at the same time, looking back and forth, 
to see "Ok, is there anything I have to change here".  Too easy to miss 
things, and end up with a broken build.  So, a few
of us banded together, and did something separately, initially just for 
our own purposes.  Once we had something to show for it, we brought it 
back to the community (on LFS-Hackers), to say "Hey, look
what we did.  Does the community see value in this, and want us to 
continue under the 'banner' of LFS?" much like Ryan/Greg did with PLFS, 
except that instead of doing something revolutionary, we took 
information from a lot of different sources (The NPTL hint, the udev 
hint, the lfs-hackers archives) and joined it together into one place.  
We were immediately branded as wanting to fork the book, something
we'd not even thought of at that time.  What we really wanted was a 
place for people who want to stay on the edge to go.  Numerous 
suggestions were made, like putting our work on the wiki (unacceptable, 
no offline access to it, no access control so anyone could change our 
work at any time, and simply something we didn't like - wiki's are great 
for certain purposes, but terrible for others), ALFS profiles (insane, 
because the ONLY people who could utilize our work were those who use 
ALFS, which excluded all of us), or hints (see above).  The majority of 
people wanted the work we did to go into HEAD, which we resisted at 
first as being overly restrictive, but eventually accepted because we 
were TOLD that we wouldn't have to be fighting these fights all the time 
in HEAD, and our editorial staff would be granted the access to do our 
work in HEAD.

I'm not sure where to go from here...there's parts of the community that 
REALLY want the work we've been doing, but another part that is very 
resistant to it, because it's different than what's been done
before.  That's the only thing I've seen....no real technical arguments 
against it, just what is IMHO knee-jerk reactions against anything 
that's new and different.

-J-




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list