From owner-freebsd-fcp@freebsd.org Wed Oct 24 13:54:05 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fcp@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56616FE5C52; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:54:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6241906FD; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:54:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id w9ODs2i7028343; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 06:54:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id w9ODs1MD028342; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 06:54:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201810241354.w9ODs1MD028342@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: FCP-0101: Deprecating most 10/100 Ethernet drivers In-Reply-To: <20181024134153.GC3125@lonesome.com> To: Mark Linimon Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 06:54:01 -0700 (PDT) CC: Bob Bishop , Brooks Davis , FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List , Ian Lepore , FreeBSD Net , "Julian H. Stacey" , Michelle Sullivan , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" , freebsd-fcp@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 14:07:21 +0000 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fcp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Community Proposals List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:54:05 -0000 > 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