Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:35:50 -0800
From:      Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To:        Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>
Cc:        Quincey Koziol <koziol@ncsa.uiuc.edu>
Subject:   Re: Aligning GENERIC with NOTES?
Message-ID:  <20040217233555.1155043D1F@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
References:  <200402162041.i1GKfV4s056904@sleipnir.ncsa.uiuc.edu> <xzpznbiyc4z.fsf@dwp.des.no> <p06002004bc56f22c9401@[172.29.253.253]> <200402171938.i1HJckEA005628@dee.skynet.be> <p0600200ebc58333220ea@[172.29.253.253]>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>  pola.  this is purely cosmetic.  please don't break my ediff.
> POLA is actually the principle you are violating most by taking 
> this stance.  You and I both know that this is -CURRENT, and is the 
> place where big changes are made.  This is the place where this kind 
> of change would be made, if ever.
> 
> It is the less experienced/less knowledgeable people for whom we 
> should be concerned about with regards to POLA.

and when current becomes stable?

what is the functional improvement of the change?  what will
the user actually get for the pain?

a very very few of us who think the generic kernel text has
crufted to the max over the years will.  10^(2..3) users who
just make kernels will not be happy.

randy



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040217233555.1155043D1F>