From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 17 00:02:52 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 94EA616A421; Sat, 17 Feb 2007 00:02:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73A2713C491; Sat, 17 Feb 2007 00:02:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ABBE1A4DB3; Fri, 16 Feb 2007 16:02:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6724C524AA; Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:02:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:02:50 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway To: Robert Watson Message-ID: <20070217000250.GA84945@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200702161712.l1GHCX81057433@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070216172621.GA80812@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070216234810.M73842@fledge.watson.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070216234810.M73842@fledge.watson.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, Joel Dahl , cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en/projects/ideas index.sgml 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: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 00:02:52 -0000 On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 11:53:54PM +0000, Robert Watson wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 05:12:33PM +0000, Joel Dahl wrote: > >>joel 2007-02-16 17:12:32 UTC > >> > >> FreeBSD doc repository > >> > >> Modified files: > >> en/projects/ideas index.sgml > >> Log: > >> Spring cleaning in preparation for Google SoC 2007. Remove the > >> following > >> projects (based on discussions with netchild and rwatson): > > > >> - FPU subsystem overhaul: Not suitable as a Google SoC project. > >> - Process Checkpointing: Not suitable as a Google SoC project. > > > >Is this a "Google SoC projects list" or a "FreeBSD projects list"? IMO > >just because something is not an appropriate SoC project doesn't mean it's > >not suitable for someone more advanced to take on. > > The FPU subsystem overhaul port has already been done by Attilio and is > available as patches, I believe, and basically requires evaluation at this > point. That evaluation might be an appropriate project for someone to work > on (although not for SoC). > > I don't mind seeing process checkpointing on an overall project idea list, > but I think we should replace the text there with something substantially > more informative. There's a significant research literature on how you do > these sorts of things and I'm not sure we want to ask people to hack it up > without figuring out what it is we actually want out of such a project. > Otherwise, patches for something we don't want will turn up and leave > disappointment all around. In particular, there are countless reasons why > simply implementing "checkpointing" of processes in isolation is relatively > meaningless, and if required, probably best done with involvement of the > application rather than transparently in the OS. In a > clustered/distributed system, checkpointing provided by the OS is a far > more meaningful concept. If we're serious about wanting checkpointing, > let's have a session at the developer summit at BSDCan on what it is we > want and why, have a couple of people read into the research literature > here, and re-add a checkpointing project once we have something a bit more > directed to put up. OK, these two I didn't snip were just examples though; more generally I think my point holds :) Kris