From owner-freebsd-current Sat Jul 19 09:08:31 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA01003 for current-outgoing; Sat, 19 Jul 1997 09:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA00998; Sat, 19 Jul 1997 09:08:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from msmith@localhost) by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.8.5/8.7.3) id BAA14511; Sun, 20 Jul 1997 01:38:12 +0930 (CST) From: Michael Smith Message-Id: <199707191608.BAA14511@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: I am contemplating the following change... In-Reply-To: <21008.869326490@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at "Jul 19, 97 08:34:50 am" To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 01:38:12 +0930 (CST) Cc: dg@root.com, jkh@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Jordan K. Hubbard stands accused of saying: > > outnumber the legacy equipment. I do know that I've certainly > received a considerable amount of negative feedback over the choice of > 5 ("5?! Who uses that anymore? 10! The default value should be > 10! What are you guys thinking?!") :-) > > How does the "user base" feel about this? ... just to clarify on my previous mail; while I think there may be a few complaints, any value is prettymuch OK given that it can be frobbed regardless. > Jordan -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[