[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: yum 2.1.0



On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 10:55 -0600, Stephen J Smoogen wrote:
> seth vidal wrote:
> >>GYUM is a UI abomination, but otherwise, it works.  I sent in a big list
> >>of UI suggestions and reasoning to the GYUM devs and never got a
> >>response - no idea if they plan on fixing the UI to be sane or leaving
> >>it the ugly, unusable mess that it is.
> >>
> >>It'd probably be easier to just write a fresh GUI from scratch using the
> >>proper tools, especially if yum 2.1.0 is as easy to wrap as Seth is
> >>indicating.
> > 
> > 
> > Here's a wacky idea, What about using system-config-packages as the
> > front end?
> > 
> 
> You are definately thinking way outside of the box there my friend.
> 
> 
> The standard operating method for any OpenSource project is to.. look at 
> existing products, think their code is crap and only a rewrite will fix 
> it, start a new project on SourceForge/Freshmeat with your complete 
> rewrite of code, start an IRC channel, and wait for developers to send 
> you patches.
> 
> After 6 months, either send out a flaming email about how the OpenSource 
> community was too jealous of your code to help you out OR have a little 
> community of users that worship your code and they will send out regular 
> emails to any other project that they should tow the line and join your 
> project or fear the Jihad.
> 
> Trying to work with existing code is almost revolutionary in concept.

You forgot to close your sarcasm tag.

here. I'll do it for you.
</sarcasm>

you know. re-reading - it might be a </cynical> tag.

:)

-sv




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]