From owner-freebsd-current  Fri May  9 23:29:33 1997
Return-Path: <owner-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA22360
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 23:29:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from helmholtz.salk.edu (helmholtz.salk.edu [198.202.70.34])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA22346;
          Fri, 9 May 1997 23:29:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pauling.salk.edu (pauling [198.202.70.108]) by helmholtz.salk.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA16547; Fri, 9 May 1997 22:45:43 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 22:45:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Bartol <bartol@salk.edu>
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, announce@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: A 3.0-current SNAP building machine has been found!
In-Reply-To: <18077.863238129@time.cdrom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970509223958.17627A-100000@pauling.salk.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk



On Fri, 9 May 1997, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:

> 
> I suppose that Terry will now suggest some sort of voting system and I
> can't even say that it's such a bad idea (just so long as I don't have
> to write the vote collection and tabulation software :-).
> 
> Comments?
> 
> 					Jordan
> 

How about a vote based on uptime or some such -- This tests many aspects
of a SNAP -- the smoother the installation goes the quicker you're up and
running and the sooner you start accumulating uptime and the more stable
you are the more uptime you get... 

Tom