[Gnu-arch-users] solving problems where your wheel is the squeekiest

[Thomas Lord]

 > Even if you are very careful about creating clean changesets,
 > this is a useful feature. For example, sometimes the build
 > process will patch files, and you don't want to commit those
 > changes.

The following has nothing to do with the AMS flame-war and
is certainly not a criticism specifically directed at Jeremy.

Why the f do people put up with crap like that ("sometimes the
build process will patch [source] files")?

And then once they're resigned to it, it winds up popping up
elsewhere, like "this new arch feature would be nice because..."


 > 'make clean && tla commit && make' 

 > Can take a very long time (hours) for something like x.org or OOo.

Isn't that something to beef to x.org and OOo about?  How does their
first-year-student-fundamentals bogosity warp into a design requirement
for revision control?  What are the relative potential labor costs,
here, of fixing their problems vs. implementing the work-around in
ancillary tools?  And who's paying?

Aren't we essentially creating a kind of abstract caste system here?


-t