From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 8 15:48:29 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BF7816A400; Mon, 8 May 2006 15:48:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [69.12.149.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3782C43D5C; Mon, 8 May 2006 15:48:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from [10.0.0.248] (trouble.errno.com [10.0.0.248]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.13.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id k48FmQt3011843 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 8 May 2006 08:48:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Message-ID: <445F684A.1080501@errno.com> Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 08:48:26 -0700 From: Sam Leffler User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060210) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: JoaoBR References: <445D3C94.10102@errno.com> <200605072146.07500.joao@matik.com.br> <445E9A3D.9090909@errno.com> <200605080845.18125.joao@matik.com.br> In-Reply-To: <200605080845.18125.joao@matik.com.br> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CFT: new ath hal (take 2) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 15:48:29 -0000 If I had intended stable users to try this code I would have: 1. posted to stable@ 2. provided specific changes for those users (e.g. a patch) You will note my initial post about a new hal was done to both mailing lists. I did not post this hal to stable because I did not want to deal with people complaining that things did not work because they had problems back-patching the necessary changes. I included info in my original post for those folks running current that were going to do it anyway so they could save some time. I replied to your post because all it did was set people up for failures that would result in mail to me that I don't have time to handle. Then those people would either get frustrated by not getting an answer or think there was some problem that wasn't being fixed. I treat the stable src tree VERY carefully. I do not inflict pain on users running stable. I do not arbitrarily commit changes that require people to manually alter their system or otherwise deal with binary incompatibilities. I treat stable as a production code base and only apply changes that are considered well-tested and appropriate to run in a production environment. Sam