RE: [logs] EventLog library

From: Rainer Gerhards (rgerhardsat_private)
Date: Tue Jan 07 2003 - 01:27:42 PST

  • Next message: Balazs Scheidler: "Re: [logs] EventLog library"

    > Ok, so what you're saying is that you're wasting time by 
    > implementing a library to an interface that has not yet been 
    > finalised.
    > As nice and easy as it is to cut code, "don't do that".
    > Get the detailed design right, THEN cut code.
    In general I agree. But we all have noticed bouncing the same ideas ever
    and ever again in a circle on this list. I at least have the feeling
    that code helps us to come to the point. It kind of forces so...
    > Code isn't needed to critique a proposed API.
    Look at the actual amount of code... I can barely envison that changes
    are hard to apply. And the waste will be very limted...
    > > I don't thing the version number alone means anything 
    > > 'unprofessional'. And by the way the library was not fully 
    > publicized, 
    > > it was a release for the log-analysis mailing list for review.
    > and it is an open, public mailing list.
    > > It is not yet in 1.0 state and versioning is usually 
    > nothing else but 
    > > personal preferences.
    > Well tell us about it when it is, not before.
    Hey Darren, how do you get people to comment, if you don't tell them ;).
    Honestly, I am the closed-source guy and I have so often been told that
    this is the real strength of open source. Timely and (massive) peer
    review - oops how am I sounding ;)
    LogAnalysis mailing list

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jan 08 2003 - 08:08:51 PST