path: root/open_issues/contributing.mdwn
diff options
author <diana@web>2015-02-16 20:08:03 +0100
committerGNU Hurd web pages engine <>2015-02-16 20:08:03 +0100
commit95878586ec7611791f4001a4ee17abf943fae3c1 (patch)
tree847cf658ab3c3208a296202194b16a6550b243cf /open_issues/contributing.mdwn
parent8063426bf7848411b0ef3626d57be8cb4826715e (diff)
rename open_issues.mdwn to service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663.mdwn
Diffstat (limited to 'open_issues/contributing.mdwn')
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 44 deletions
diff --git a/open_issues/contributing.mdwn b/open_issues/contributing.mdwn
deleted file mode 100644
index 7ae742f0..00000000
--- a/open_issues/contributing.mdwn
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,44 +0,0 @@
-[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
-[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
-id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
-document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
-any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
-Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license
-is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
-[[!tag open_issue_documentation]]
-This should be integrated into [[/contributing]].
-Every now and then, people show up who have an inward urge to contribute to the
-GNU Hurd, but have some difficulties about how to do that.
-For example, IRC, #hurd, 2010-10-06:
- <rah> I find it difficult to find the will to contribute to the hurd while hurd != hurd-ng
- <pochu> hurd-ng?
- <pochu> ah,
- <pochu> rah: you may want to work on achieving that then
- <rah> pochu: I'm not in a position to do OS research
- <antrik> rah: if you are not into OS research, why do you need it to be ngHurd? :-)
- <rah> antrik: I don't want to work on software which I know is already obsolete
- <tschwinge> rah: My position on that can be found here; you may want to think about it.
- <antrik> rah: the existing Hurd implementation is not any more obsolete than any other large software project
- <antrik> there are always things that could be redone in a better way some time in the future
- <antrik> but we have to start somewhere
- <antrik> software development is a dynamic process
- <antrik> trying to come up with a perfect design before you write any code will never lead anywhere, ever
- <rah> antrik: of course, but when you know your start is wrong, have identified its problems, and are in the process of designing a second attempt, working on the first seems pointless
- <antrik> rah: well, do you know all these things? because I do not
- <antrik> what the experiments with new Hurd designs proved so far is that nobody is in a position to claim, "I have a better design"
- <antrik> it's not hard to come up with a design that is better in some points -- but it's damn hard to come up with one that's not lacking in others
- <antrik> the existing Hurd design is actually the only one which we *know* to work
- <antrik> while research on improving the design is certainly beneficial, it's not like there is something new ready to replace the existing design at any moment
- <antrik> and frankly, I'm more and more convinced that only iterative changes can ever result in any real improvement
- <antrik> (and doing these changes requires a certain momentum, which we will never gain unless we actually have something usable first)
- <LarstiQ> rah: afaik, not much is being done of designing another attempt
- <rah> antrik: yes, I know all these things