From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 14 01:30:03 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25B8816A418; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:30:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E898713C45D; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:30:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A85A46B7C; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 20:30:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:30:02 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Scott Long In-Reply-To: <4761D791.5010003@samsco.org> Message-ID: <20071214011347.M86532@fledge.watson.org> References: <200712122021.lBCKLdvt045540@repoman.freebsd.org> <20071213223319.E81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <4761BB7C.3010907@elischer.org> <4761CB3F.3030905@delphij.net> <4761CDBA.9010906@samsco.org> <20071214005643.R86532@fledge.watson.org> <4761D791.5010003@samsco.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, d@delphij.net, Kip Macy , Kip Macy , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Julian Elischer , cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/conf files src/sys/netinet tcp_ofld.c tcp_ofld.h tcp_var.h toedev.h src/sys/sys socket.h 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: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:30:03 -0000 On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Scott Long wrote: >> Let's not discourage that just yet. > > Yes, I would like to discourage disrespectful nit-picking of an important > piece of work. I think you're reading too much into Bjoern's comments. >> I'd like to see all significant changes to TCP discussed on public mailing >> lists well before they are committed -- at that point, someone saying >> "actually, I'd name the files a bit differently" is a lot easier to deal >> with than, say, immediately after they are committed. This needs to be >> communally owned and maintained code, or in two years time we'll find >> ourselves in the same position: architectural well-meant changes that are >> mostly right, but with no review of the details leading to the inevitable >> failures. > > A failure of what, exactly? Will the names that Kip chose lead to failures > of TCP sessions? Please enlighten me here. This thread is a symptom of a specific problem: a failure to seek review for the work before committing. I'm sure I'm not the only person who saw this commit and went, "So where was the public request for review for a major change to our TCP stack?" Requests for more consistent naming, etc, are coming out now precisely because that review wasn't sort *before* committing. TOE represents a significant architectural modification, including a new KPI for device drivers to implement: details matter. Some of these new filenames, function names, field names, etc, will be embedded in third-party source code for the forseeable future. No one is saying that Kip's work isn't appreciated or valued -- rather, that at some point with a piece of code as sensitive and critical at TCP, it needs to go through careful review and refinement. I sent Kip a large patch within an hour of his commit to clean up similar sorts of problems within the file,s making it comply more with the general TCP style but also to follow conventions for field-naming in data structures, etc, which he committed along with refinments of his own. And, FWIW, this doesn't appear to be a bikeshed, because other than you arguing that this is turning into a bikeshed, no one seems to disagree with the proposed renaming so far. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge