From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [66.249.92.175] (helo=ug-out-1314.google.com) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JFWT4-0003PA-CT for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:15:46 +0100 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id i24so369495ugd.24 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:15:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.242.5 with SMTP id p5mr3489397ugh.4.1200582942852; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:15:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?89.252.38.142? ( [89.252.38.142]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j33sm2896437ugc.63.2008.01.17.07.15.41 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:15:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:23:27 +0200 From: Paul Sokolovsky X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.64.01 Christmas Edition) Professional X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1179311965.20080117172327@gmail.com> To: Rolf Leggewie In-Reply-To: References: <413710907.20080117131841@gmail.com> <478F4876.9030405@student.utwente.nl> <1012527691.20080117145250@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [oe-commits] org.oe.dev apm: turn off wifi cards before suspend so they are fully reloaded upon resume. closes 3664. X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:15:46 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Rolf, Thursday, January 17, 2008, 4:34:41 PM, you wrote: > Paul, > thank you for pointing out the problem and a template solution towards > the end of your initial rant as well. In fact I am already working on Thanks for acting on that. > moving the mid-term fix into a separate package to provide an even less > intrusive mid-term fix -> > http://oz.leggewie.org/wip/wifi-suspend.patch > But... > Paul Sokolovsky schrieb: >> and of course they need to be supported still, and right now. The question >> is how that is done - if it comes mixed into one big mess > ^^^^ >> I don't appreciate someone moving in the opposite direction just to solve on-spot problem. OE is > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> powerful environment allowing to solve make focused, maintainable and >> reusable changes - even if they're workarounds, and people should >> learn to use them. > And I don't appreciate after I have > * fixed a real usability issue which likely strongly influences the > perception of OE-derived distros > * consulted with a *LOT* of people on IRC and in the bug tracker over > several days > * have put quite some time into finding an acceptable solution for > everyone > that someone comes around who had previously been quiet on this and then > calls my work a "mess" and generally finds very unappreciative words for > what I've done and the time I've spent. Oh, do we need a bit of affirmative action here again? ;-) Ok, so "mess" is not your work, it's what core layer of OE runtime is, to the large extent. Being with OE for quite some time, I know such problem areas, and try to work towards resolving them. That's hard to do on one's own, so I humbly expects that other experienced OE developers to share such approach, instead of trying to apply pain-of-day patches, just increasing existing mess. As for IRC, unfortunately, I don't have much time to be on it lately, but I try to be on MLs. So, don't get too hot about receiving *one more* comment if you already received them a lot. OE is big system, and noone can know and be up to date with all its areas. > Mickey's comment > # I agree. The issue to fix is worthwile, but I would prefer seperate > # packaging as well. > sounds quite different, don't you agree? Nope, I don't ;-). I don't see anything special about communication which goes your way, no matter who's the other side, sorry ;-). > FOSS is an incremental process. > I am willing to get this not only right for me, but to everyone's > satisfaction. Great, so I just provide my comments on the matter. You may wonder how it gets often that you and I get into communication (though I of course give comments to other people too). But even that should be rather clear - because we both care about almost the same area regarding OE, albeit with different approaches and plans. In this regard, I appreciate your review, suggestions, and comments! > But I kindly want to ask you to consider that it is not > only what you say but also how you say it. > PS: I don't intend to and hope I did not start another flame war, but > this is important to me. Just in case, there's still personal mail around... -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com