From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 26 06:43:11 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 308FE16A402; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 06:43:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA24F13C45D; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 06:43:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from phobos.samsco.home (phobos.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l3Q6ggQr018318; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:42:42 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <463049C6.9080100@samsco.org> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:42:14 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2pre) Gecko/20070111 SeaMonkey/1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yar Tikhiy References: <200704211417.l3LEHUKK078832@repoman.freebsd.org> <462A27CD.5090006@freebsd.org> <1177170852.32761.0.camel@localhost> <20070424091858.GA31094@comp.chem.msu.su> <462FA0BC.8020207@freebsd.org> <20070426054228.GA53614@comp.chem.msu.su> In-Reply-To: <20070426054228.GA53614@comp.chem.msu.su> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:42:42 -0600 (MDT) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.5 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.8 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Andre Oppermann , cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Stephan Uphoff , Coleman Kane Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/amd64/amd64 pmap.c src/sys/i386/i386 pmap.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 06:43:11 -0000 Yar Tikhiy wrote: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 02:41:00PM -0400, Stephan Uphoff wrote: >> Yar Tikhiy wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 09:54:12AM -0600, Coleman Kane wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 17:03 +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: >>>> >>>>> Stephan Uphoff wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> ups 2007-04-21 14:17:30 UTC >>>>>> >>>>>> FreeBSD src repository >>>>>> >>>>>> Modified files: >>>>>> sys/amd64/amd64 pmap.c >>>>>> sys/i386/i386 pmap.c >>>>>> Log: >>>>>> Modify TLB invalidation handling. >>>>>> >>>>>> Reviewed by: alc@, peter@ >>>>>> MFC after: 1 week >>>>>> >>>>> Could you be a bit more verbose what changed here and why it >>>>> was done? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I agree. I would really like to know what the modification accomplishes. >>>> >>> Alas, we don't live in an ideal world. If we did, our commit >>> messages would always follow the well-known guideline: >>> >>> 0. Tell the essence of the change. >>> 1. Give the reason for the change. >>> 2. Explain the change unless it's trivial. >>> >>> >> In the ideal world there are no NDAs :-) > > Was the change based on a document under NDA? Then this case raises > an interesting question: to what extent an open source developer > is allowed to explain his code that was based on a document under > NDA? Of course, it should depend on the NDA, but I suspect that a > typical NDA requires a lawyer to interpret it unambiguously (I've > never signed one by myself), and an overcautious lawyer would say > that the open source code itself violates the NDA because anybody > can RTFS. :-) > Wow, that was painful to read. NDAs that specifically allow source code licensing and distribution are quite common. They even get written and reviewed by lawyers! =-) Scott