Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 06:54:01 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk>, Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com>, Michelle Sullivan <michelle@sorbs.net>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>, freebsd-fcp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FCP-0101: Deprecating most 10/100 Ethernet drivers Message-ID: <201810241354.w9ODs1MD028342@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <20181024134153.GC3125@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 05:19:33AM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > And I have read case law that boiled down to the presents vs absence > > of a comma > > If we are now going to evaluate all proposed changes to FreeBSD on the > same rigid principles as the US legal system, I'm done. I do not think "all" is in scope here, but I do feel should excercise care about procedure. And FYI, the case law above I am pretty sure was not US. I also believe that what is at issue here can be fixed rather easily without ever going down the minor vs major slippery slope by some rather simple changes to order of events and careful steps. Warner came very close, I think he just applied his correct "fix" to 1/2 of the problem. There is the stage where the FCP is before core being voted on, and there is the stage that the FCP has been approved. He only addressed 1 of those, and he did so by allowing core to trivially modify the document during the voting process, and I am actually fine with that idea, its good, it is what should be allowed. I trust core to know what is minor vs major. BUTT it still does not cover the issue of the author/submitter modifying the document while it is in core being reviewed and possibly modified. I have issue with that. It is very hard to vote/formally review on something that is fluid. I have not been asked to trust these people with the trust I give core, so I would like to remove that. We could add that once the document is submitted to core any change to it between submitting and vote by core requires core to be involved, even if it is simply an ack of a change has been made to what was submitted. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201810241354.w9ODs1MD028342>