feedback feedback (was: BZ#15819, BZ#15722)

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>]

On Nov 13, 2014, Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com> wrote:

> This too has apparently ignored my feedback

Now, now, that's quite an unfair assessment!  ;-)  See below.


On Nov 13, 2014, Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com> wrote:

> Did you not see my feedback

I did, and I'm afraid I followed it strictly to the letter, even where
it made for more work for myself :-(


> saying to prefer new local headers instead of
> changes to include/ wrapper headers?

You wrote new local headers should be preferred over magic in internal
headers.  I reasoned that, since I had not suggested adding any magic to
internal headers, this was general guidance that didn't apply.  Even
more so given that you'd suggested I should untangle the headers, which
would only make sense as part of these changes if we were to keep on
using the same headers, rather than introducing new ones.  Untangling
the headers would require the usual __need_* idiom, and that was higher
in your comments (and thus priorities, I reasoned) than introducing new
headers.  So...  I didn't ignore your feedback, I just got something
different from them than what you meant :-(


Anyway...  Now that I (hope I) know what you really meant to suggest,
I'll simplify and adjust the patches to match my current understanding.
Biab, ;-)

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter    http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/   FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer