On 04/06/2011 12:46 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Gleb Natapov<gleb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 11:33:33AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > So no, your kind of cynical, defeatist sentiment about code quality is by > > no means true in my experience. Projects become ugly gooballs once > > maintainers stop caring enough. > > In case of Qemu it was other way around. Maintainers started caring too late. Nah, i do not think it's ever too late to care. Example: arch/i386 - arch/x86_64/ was very messy for many, many years and we turned it around and can be proud of arch/x86/ today - but i guess i'm somewhat biased there ;-) In my experience it's entirely possible to turn a messy gooball into something you can be proud of - it's all reversible. Start small, with the core bits you care about most - then extend those concepts to other areas of the code base, gradually. There might be subsystems that will never turn around before becoming obsolete - that's not a big problem.
That is what we're trying to do with qemu. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
