Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> I don't know of any Fedora application that works >> with Fedora kernel 2.6.x.y-n >> that does not work equally well with vanilla kernel 2.6.x.y . >> That is what I mean by orthogonal. > > There have been some examples in the past seen in bugzilla. These are > treated as bugs and fixed. If an application does not work with a current vanilla kernel, then in my view there is a bug in the application, not the kernel. >> It used to be much more difficult than it is today, >> because Torvalds and team have cleaned things up >> and organized them better. >> In my view the Fedora developers could learn a lesson from this. >> Fedora is becoming much too spaghetti-like. > > That's amusing since "Torvalds and team" includes Fedora developers. Red > Hat is the largest commercial contributor to the Linux kernel. That does not contradict what I said in any way. It is the organization of Fedora that I am talking about, not individual applications. I repeat: in my view Fedora is becoming too complex, and would benefit greatly from simplification and organization. > Do you have bug reports on what you consider "sphagetti-like". A "spaghetti-like development" is not a bug. Examples of what I mean would be most audio and video aspects of Fedora-7. Also things like conflicting config generators, as eg system-config-printer contrasted with the web interface to CUPS. Nb This is not a serious criticism of Fedora, simply a response to those who were arguing that I was wrong in preferring to keep distribution and kernel orthogonal. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail (<80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
