From owner-freebsd-current Wed Jun 19 09:37:46 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA26967 for current-outgoing; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 09:37:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from epprod.elsevier.co.uk (epprod.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.222.35]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA26947 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 09:37:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snowdon.elsevier.co.uk (snowdon.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.197.164]) by epprod.elsevier.co.uk (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA20403 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:36:13 +0100 Received: from cadair.elsevier.co.uk (actually host cadair) by snowdon with SMTP (PP); Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:36:31 +0100 Received: (from dpr@localhost) by cadair.elsevier.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA28147; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:35:46 +0100 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:35:46 +0100 Message-Id: <199606191635.RAA28147@cadair.elsevier.co.uk> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: tcl -- what's going on here. In-Reply-To: <24298.835200143@time.cdrom.com> References: <199606191153.MAA07207@cadair.elsevier.co.uk> <24298.835200143@time.cdrom.com> Reply-To: p.richards@elsevier.co.uk From: Paul Richards X-Attribution: Paul X-Mailer: GNU Emacs [19.30.1], RMAIL, Mailcrypt [3.3] Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >>>>> ""Jordan" == "Jordan K Hubbard" writes: >> Unfortunately, it's a fact of life in FreeBSD these days that >> certain people in core consider FreeBSD to be theirs and don't see >> any need to "Jordan> Needless to say, I disagree rather totally with Paul's "Jordan> summary of this situation but I'm not going to waste my time "Jordan> rebutting his individual points. Every time I've gotten "Jordan> sucked into one of Paul's impassioned shit-stirring debates "Jordan> I've regretted it. Not this time. The message may be worth "Jordan> debating, but this particular messenger has lost all "Jordan> credibility with me and by all appearances, it's only a good "Jordan> fight he wants. Any larger purpose is notable only by its "Jordan> absence. No-one here has any recollection of any discussion taking place regarding this and all responses have been opposed to it. I'm really not interested in a fight at all, I just don't want the tree to get full of crap like this and if you were willing to discuss such major changes with us all such bad feeling would never arise in the first place. I'm pissed off by the attitude you have that technical discussions just hold up progress and to just go it alone with whatever idea you happen to agree with. Changing the policy of bmaking everything in the main tree seems quite significant to me and not a decision that was yours to make alone and you clearly haven't considered all the implications of such a change. Can we hold off on this until people have had a chance to comment, the clear consensus is that this is a bad move.