From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 10 14:18:29 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B64A16A469 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:18:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: from mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.4.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0743B13C4D9 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:18:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: from flosoft.no-ip.biz (ool-435559b8.dyn.optonline.net [67.85.89.184]) by mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTP id <0JUF00ARRMEJO5Y0@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:18:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from flosoft.no-ip.biz (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by flosoft.no-ip.biz (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m0AEIHw2000241; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:18:18 -0500 Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:18:17 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" In-reply-to: <200801101413.m0AEDZsb058894@lurza.secnetix.de> To: Oliver Fromme Message-id: <47862929.50901@gmail.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 References: <200801101413.m0AEDZsb058894@lurza.secnetix.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20080104) Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD's problems as seen by the BSDForen.de community X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:18:29 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > > > > Just a side question... if it is so complete why was there a need to > > modify the orginal UCB version?... specifically there is no reason not > > to discuss improvements. > > The modification that happened was to remove restrictions. > What you propose is to add restrictions, which means that > it would be less free. That's a step backwards and will > not happen. Which are completely optional (adding options is always good)... as it currently stands it makes the situation no real option except for making the != in my signature into a == > > > If the root cause of the OP's issues is lack of interest in older code > > The OP's posting rather sounds like regression testing and > QA needs to be improved. Which are always unglamorous jobs and thus the least likelly to be done without some kind of reward greater then a pat on the back. - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems, Java Developer Tools. http://www.flosoft-systems.com Developer, not business, friendly. "Free software != Free beer" Blog: http://www.flosoft-systems.com/flosoft_systems_community/blogs/aryeh/index.php -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHhikpjRvRjGmHRgQRAvmZAKCzdLHoAgy5oNL66HKBBnhfJasFSgCgiW2V w7pBfhNhYrF3lqS5XYhgPTU= =nPho -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----