On 06/24/2009 10:22 PM, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
Now happened with the name, but in the future one can think of something else, turning in a chaotic evolution, so we rather (and better) have it clear from this point of time, otherwise makes no sense to continue.
daniel,
rather than complaining, work on the goal that allows you to change the binary name and name used in the docs and scripts by changing MAIN_NAME in Makefile.defs.
well, I haven't seen such attitude and commitment when was about updating the modules to compile with sip router or porting k tm or core features. But suddenly because one decides alone to do some change, others should work to fix it now. No, thanks. My list of volunteer work is full of other more useful things at this time. Probably I am not the best one to ask for more free contribution on useless aspects, besides the fact makefile is not a strong point of me.
I believe I am not sitting aside at all and complaining to others to do something for me. It got to this point because of how the rename action was undertaken. Be sure I would have had same reaction if something else would have been changed in the core affecting the project.
Daniel