From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 20 14:58:53 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5F2616A562 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 14:58:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailtoaster1.pipeline.ch (mailtoaster1.pipeline.ch [62.48.0.70]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47F5843D91 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 14:57:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 5953 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2004 22:57:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freebsd.org) ([62.48.0.54]) (envelope-sender ) by mailtoaster1.pipeline.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 20 Jan 2004 22:57:48 -0000 Message-ID: <400DB26C.FAA625D3@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 23:57:48 +0100 From: Andre Oppermann X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Poul-Henning Kamp References: <10340.1074638096@critter.freebsd.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: John Baldwin Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/alpha support.s src/sys/i386/i386swtch.s src/sys/kern kern_shutdown.c src/sys/sys systm.h X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:58:53 -0000 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > In message <200401201730.58556.jhb@FreeBSD.org>, John Baldwin writes: > >On Tuesday 20 January 2004 04:33 pm, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >> I suggest you and everybody else calm down and let dust settle for > >> a couple of days, maybe other people should have a chance to say > >> their opinion. If there is a clear concensus that this is bad > >> (maybe somebody neutral should take a count ?), then we'll back it > >> out. > > > >Sounds fair to me. I was keying off what I have seen so far of the thread in > >committers@. Partly it seemed that you had implied that myself and others > >who objected didn't care about how users felt or didn't want to bother in > >fixing reported bugs and that stung a bit. Nevertheless, the tone of my > >e-mail was quite a bit over the top, and I should have cooled off a bit more > >before replying. > > That's allright, no offense taken. Thank you guys. Lets concentrate on the technical and operational issues at hand and not (just) on the names attached to it. This ain't slashdot where only 2% read the article and 98% jump on conclusions based on the abstract in the post (or certain (anti-) buzz words). ;) -- Andre