You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> on 2002/04/09 15:58:39 UTC
Re: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to describe critical
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>
> Ryan, if you look into the archives, you'll see that I tried (several times)
> to submit patches to the LibTool team... And version is still 1.4.2...
>
AFAIK, the *only* one who has been successful in getting *anything* folded
into libtool has been Sascha... I have no idea why. Every else's
submissions seem to wind up in a black hole.
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
RE: Libtool liaison (Was: RE: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to describe critical)
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: Bill Stoddard [mailto:bill@wstoddard.com]
> Sent: 09 April 2002 20:05
> +1
+1 We need to invest in better cross project communication. Especially
when its about projects we are dependend on.
> > Just in case, I'll do it, if only to make sure it gets done if the group
> > thinks it's a valid solution.
Sander
Re: Libtool liaison (Was: RE: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to describe critical)
Posted by Bill Stoddard <bi...@wstoddard.com>.
+1
> Just in case, I'll do it, if only to make sure it gets done if the group
> thinks it's a valid solution.
>
> --
> ===========================================================================
> Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
> "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
> will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
>
Libtool liaison (Was: RE: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to
describe critical)
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Just in case, I'll do it, if only to make sure it gets done if the group
thinks it's a valid solution.
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
RE: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to describe critical
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:jim@jaguNET.com]
>
> At 10:13 AM -0400 4/9/02, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> >
> >It's the same reason we let patches to the http server fall into the
> black hole. When we
> >get a patch from someone we do not know (and trust) and the patch is
not
> scratching an
> >active developer itch, it generally gets ignored (unfortunate but
true).
> Sascha has earned
> >some level of trust with the libtool dev team. It would be really
good if
> someone from our
> >team spent some time earning the trust of the libtool dev team, and
> perhaps being invited
> >in as a committer :-)
> >
>
> I'd love to do that, unless the consensus is that my reputation
> would precede me :)
Only the good parts Jim. :-)
Ryan
Re: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to describe critical
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
At 10:13 AM -0400 4/9/02, Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
>It's the same reason we let patches to the http server fall into the black hole. When we
>get a patch from someone we do not know (and trust) and the patch is not scratching an
>active developer itch, it generally gets ignored (unfortunate but true). Sascha has earned
>some level of trust with the libtool dev team. It would be really good if someone from our
>team spent some time earning the trust of the libtool dev team, and perhaps being invited
>in as a committer :-)
>
I'd love to do that, unless the consensus is that my reputation
would precede me :)
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
Re: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to describe critical
Posted by Bill Stoddard <bi...@wstoddard.com>.
> Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> >
> > Ryan, if you look into the archives, you'll see that I tried (several times)
> > to submit patches to the LibTool team... And version is still 1.4.2...
> >
>
> AFAIK, the *only* one who has been successful in getting *anything* folded
> into libtool has been Sascha... I have no idea why. Every else's
> submissions seem to wind up in a black hole.
It's the same reason we let patches to the http server fall into the black hole. When we
get a patch from someone we do not know (and trust) and the patch is not scratching an
active developer itch, it generally gets ignored (unfortunate but true). Sascha has earned
some level of trust with the libtool dev team. It would be really good if someone from our
team spent some time earning the trust of the libtool dev team, and perhaps being invited
in as a committer :-)
Bill
>
> --
> ===========================================================================
> Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
> "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
> will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
>
Re: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to describe critical
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"Ryan Bloom" <rb...@covalent.net> wrote:
> The problem is that when we went to libtool, we called this out as a
> problem (in fact, many people said they had seen this happen before).
> The group's decision was that we could just make it happen. If we need
> Sascha to submit the patches, then let's ask him to do it. If that
> still doesn't work, then we have a bunch of intelligent developers on
> this list. We can re-write libtool so that we aren't dependant on a
> group of developers who don't want external help.
A BIG F**KING +1 ON THE REWRITE... The versioning idea behind it is just
way-too-bogus to even be fun! :) And no, I'm not volunteering to do it! :)
Pier (GNU LibTool is worse than BugZilla)
RE: 2.0.35 for Darwin was Re: where to describe critical
Posted by Ryan Bloom <rb...@covalent.net>.
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:jim@jaguNET.com]
>
> Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> >
> > Ryan, if you look into the archives, you'll see that I tried
(several
> times)
> > to submit patches to the LibTool team... And version is still
1.4.2...
> >
>
> AFAIK, the *only* one who has been successful in getting *anything*
folded
> into libtool has been Sascha... I have no idea why. Every else's
> submissions seem to wind up in a black hole.
The problem is that when we went to libtool, we called this out as a
problem (in fact, many people said they had seen this happen before).
The group's decision was that we could just make it happen. If we need
Sascha to submit the patches, then let's ask him to do it. If that
still doesn't work, then we have a bunch of intelligent developers on
this list. We can re-write libtool so that we aren't dependant on a
group of developers who don't want external help.
Ryan