Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 12:54:44 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: nate@sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) Cc: terry@lambert.org, wollman@lcs.mit.edu, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Anybody using netns? Message-ID: <199602121954.MAA20651@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199602121945.MAA19759@rocky.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Feb 12, 96 12:45:29 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Unless someone else is both currently using this code /and/ willing to > > > maintain it for us (which includes at a minimum eliminating the kernel > > > compilation warnings), it will be nuked in a day or so. > > > > > > Speak now or forever hold your peace! > > > > Why remove things that are optional, but not present by default? > > Tree bloat. Why not make things 'smaller' given that the things that > make it bigger are useless (un-maintained, un-compilable, etc..) given > that the sources to those objects are still publically available in the > CVS tree to anyone who is interested in them. Tree bloat is not an excuse. If you don't like it, don't copy it/check it out. "Uncompilable" sounds like a problem with partial integration of new code when full integration is what's called for. "Nuke" did not sound like it was to remain in the CVS tree. > Obviously it's more difficult to look at them now, but should the > majority of the people using the system by 'penalized' (wasting their > disk space, etc..) to allow access to old, stale code? If they don't want to waste space on it, they don't have to copy it onto their disk. Or they can simply remove it. Like I do with IDE drivers on most of the production systems I install. > (My answer is in agreement with Garrett. Remove it!) Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199602121954.MAA20651>