From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Nov 7 17:31:51 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B66FD37B401; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 17:31:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from scl8owa02.int.exodus.net (scl8out02.exodus.net [66.35.230.242]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 543C943E6E; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 17:31:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Maksim.Yevmenkin@exodus.net) Received: from scl8owa01.int.exodus.net ([66.35.230.241]) by scl8owa02.int.exodus.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 7 Nov 2002 17:31:44 -0800 Received: from exodus.net ([206.220.227.147]) by scl8owa01.int.exodus.net over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 7 Nov 2002 17:31:44 -0800 Message-ID: <3DCB13FF.14F7BD79@exodus.net> Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 17:31:43 -0800 From: Maksim Yevmenkin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Terry Lambert Cc: Sam Leffler , Julian Elischer , arch@FreeBSD.ORG, "Long, Scott" , re@FreeBSD.ORG, Murray Stokely Subject: Re: Bluetooth code References: <038501c286b2$5efb1890$52557f42@errno.com> <3DCAFCA8.DF1FF47A@mindspring.com> <03fc01c286c1$59e2a170$52557f42@errno.com> <3DCB0EF9.617D66B5@mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Nov 2002 01:31:44.0068 (UTC) FILETIME=[988AE040:01C286C6] Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Terry Lambert wrote: > > Sam Leffler wrote: > > > The counterargument is "port NetGraph to NetBSD, OpenBSD, and BSDI". > > > > > > The issue that's being raised here is "Who gets to lead the parade?"; > > > the answer "Be a follower, not a leader" isn't very satisfying to > > > anyone. > > > > The issue is should we commit something to the source tree that may be of > > limited use to people. If the software provides functionality to a > > significant group of people then I'm open to its inclusion regardless of > > whether it's present in any other system. However one must not lose sight > > that adding code to the source tree has a cost, independent of whether it is > > "hooked up to the build". If the code doesn't have someone to maintain it > > as the system changes then it can become a boat anchor. > > Well, the Bluetooth code has an active developer, it has some > applications that are available for it already, and it's severable > from the main source tree in a way that boat anchors aren't. > > There's some small argument that's valid, that if ports are written > to use a Netgraph bluetooth stack, they won't be that portable to > other BSD's that don't have Netgraph. This is a valid argument, > but it appears that NetBSD doesn't even have real Bluetooth at this, > point, so it's kind of moot. the ports *will not* be tied to the Netgraph. they *never were*. there is no reason to re-invent the wheel. my current ports are from Linux BlueZ include SDP, RFCOMM, hcidump and l2test. ports *do use* similar API - Bluetooth sockets. what i do is 1) remove autoconf 2) fix #include's 3) fix constant's etc. 4) remove/rewrite some Linux specific stuff it usually takes about 4 hours to make a complete working port (including basic interoperability testing). BlueZ author and i currently discussing common API to make porting even easier. Linux is more advanced in Bluetooth (Linux has three(!) stacks: BlueZ, Affix and OpenBT). i'm trying to learn from them and do not make the same mistakes. > > Code rot is unhealthy for maintaining quality software. Code rot > > happens quickly when noone uses it. > > I disagree. There is no such thing as code rot. There are only > jerks who changes working interfaces, and fail to maintain the > code that uses them. I have an example list a mile long on that > one, too. Institutionalizing the acceptability of "code rot" is > institutionalizing the acceptability of being a jerk. It's a > completely seperate issue from whether or not code falls into > disuse. max To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message