| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
New maintainers for the x86 architectureNew maintainers for the x86 architecturePosted Oct 22, 2007 19:17 UTC (Mon) by hummassa (subscriber, #307)In reply to: New maintainers for the x86 architecture by MisterIO Parent article: New maintainers for the x86 architecture
Care to clarify this?? Andi has good arguments, he does not agree with the unifying patch, why should he -- voluntarily -- work (and it's a lot of work) under conditions he does not agree with?
(Log in to post comments)
New maintainers for the x86 architecture Posted Oct 22, 2007 20:04 UTC (Mon) by MisterIO (guest, #36192) [Link] Because that's exactly what I said.If your ego is not too much bigger than your intelligence(I call it intelligence,but obviosly we ne to agree about what intelligence really is.I mean generic-intelligence),then you can still work on such an important task to make it better.
New maintainers for the x86 architecture Posted Oct 22, 2007 21:32 UTC (Mon) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] But surely if he disagrees with the design of the subsystem, he shouldn't be expected to maintain it. He's been perfectly gracious in stepping aside to let other people try to run with the design they want to use, but it should be up to the people promoting a particular design to take responsibility for making sure it works. If x86 were to turn out to be unmaintainable and Andi were still in charge of it, it would be hard to tell if a maintainer who liked the approach more would be able to make it work. It just makes more sense in terms of aligning motivations if other people are in charge of making it work, and Andi is simply an experienced developer.
New maintainers for the x86 architecture Posted Oct 23, 2007 9:37 UTC (Tue) by jengelh (subscriber, #33263) [Link] People do not just work voluntarily, but also for companies. Whether that is the case here or not, I am not sure, but I just wanted to say this.
|
|
||||||||||||