Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 00:55:39 -0800 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: sthaug@nethelp.no, phk@critter.freebsd.dk, des@flood.ping.uio.no, darrenr@reed.wattle.id.au, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sysctl descriptions Message-ID: <199901100855.AAA04475@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 10 Jan 1999 00:41:34 PST." <50343.915957694@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
... actually, at the moment the only reason we are facing this need for a tiebreaker is because Poul is being obstructionistic. If he had good technical reasons for not having the descriptions embedded, there would have been rapid consensus and DES would have removed them. Poul is attempting to manipulate core's legendary slothfulness to legitmise his actions; you're welcome to decide for yourself how reprehensible you feel this is. What we are most in need of is a mechanism whereby we can convince developers to continue to operate within the bounds of the currently-functional consensus system. At the moment, we have a couple of rogues outside that are causing us some serious grief. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901100855.AAA04475>