svn commit: r185499 - head

[Alfred Perlstein]

* Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav <des at des.no> [081204 10:21] wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein <alfred at freebsd.org> writes:
> > No, I'm trying to get a simple target that makes sense that will
> > prevent people from breaking tinderbox.  (failing that then turning
> > tinderbox off because it's too complex)
> 
> Perhaps if you tell me what it is about the tinderbox that you don't
> understand, I could help you understand it.

I think I have all I need right now.  I was getting confused
because I was being told by multiple confused developers that
"tinderbox" was different things because it's complicated.

We should probably review all these committers and paddle them
or yank their commit bits for being stupid or something.

> > Lets just say it takes a developer about an hour or two to be
> > "enlightened" as to a new system instead of just being told "hey
> > run this one liner", you've just soaked up $number_of_committers *
> > $enlightenment_time man hours.
> 
> What is new about the build system?  And why do you think it's a bad
> idea for committers to understand how it works?  Do you really want to
> run an operating system written by people who do not understand how it
> is built?

It should not be a requirement that a developer need to know
all this stuff.  And by stuff I mean "how to roll my own tinderbox".

I do find it amusing that you're asserting that _I'm_ saying this
when I'm the only one it appears that could fix this target. :)

I'm more concerned about developing anything where I have to work
with people that don't take input on issues, yell at people for not
understanding complex systems and winge for god knows how long about
a 20 line patch just because it wasn't exactly "how they would have
done it"... WHEN IN FACT THEY REFUSED AND WOULD NOT HAVE "DONE IT".

> > That and, since the process requires "enlightenment", you've caused
> > that developer to "page out" whatever they had in their head to work
> > on, _every time they commit_.  Soooooo frustrating.
> 
> I wonder - does anybody else than you have that problem?  Don't you
> think that once people understand how the build system works, they would
> be able to do this without much thought?  As a bonus, they will also
> know how to rebuild just the parts they modified, instead of the entire
> tree, shaving hours off the edit-compile-test cycle.

Yes, that's great, but it should be optional.  We shouldn't beat
things into people.

> > And I'm done too!
> 
> But in the process, you managed to piss off just about everybody who had
> an interest in the matter.

That was your choice.  So far I'm not aware of anyone that's quit
freebsd in the past few years due to anything I've done.

(really done now) :)

-- 
- Alfred Perlstein