From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Sep 10 02:36:19 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D075F16A403;
	Sun, 10 Sep 2006 02:36:19 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9545A43D46;
	Sun, 10 Sep 2006 02:36:19 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
	id 4893C1113; Sat,  9 Sep 2006 21:36:19 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 21:36:19 -0500
To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20060910023619.GA32206@soaustin.net>
References: <200609100159.k8A1xAIn089481@drugs.dv.isc.org>
	<20060909231448.E1031@ganymede.hub.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20060909231448.E1031@ganymede.hub.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon)
Cc: Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews@isc.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ARRRRGH! Guys, who's breaking -STABLE's GMIRROR code?!
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 02:36:19 -0000

On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 11:16:29PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> This should be documented somewhere clearly then, as my understanding was 
> that -STABLE meant that anything MFCd back to it *was* tested and deemed 
> stable ...

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/version-guide/decision-points.html

> but "blantant and obvious bugs due to insufficient testing", IMHO, doesn't
> classify as an 'oops' ....

You've already made this point -- 3 times.  What would you like us to do
now, punish the committer?

Simply reiterating your criticism and unhappiness isn't going to do anything
to fix this problem (for which, of course, a fix has already been made), or
the next one(s) either.

It was an error, it's been fixed, may I suggest we move on to the next bug?

mcl