From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu May 2 23:39:24 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org (hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org [205.147.43.8]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03A4737B416; Thu, 2 May 2002 23:39:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g436bab89675; Thu, 2 May 2002 23:37:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dave@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org) Message-Id: <200205030637.g436bab89675@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Brooks Davis Cc: Michael Sierchio , Terry Lambert , Drew Tomlinson , bmah@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Difference between RELENG_* and RELENG_*_BP Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 02 May 2002 23:37:31 -0700 From: Dave Hayes Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Brooks Davis writes: > DO NOT EVEN CONSIDER STARTING THIS THREAD!!! It's been hashed Double gah. Forget I said anything. ;) > However, just ranting about this problem[0] won't accomplish anything > other then wasting a lot of time and energy, IMO. There's plenty of > historic evidence to support this view in the archives. If you want > change you'll have to try another one. These kinds of threads are indicative of a meta-problem. The loop goes like this: 1) Someone new brings up a "flame...er hashed over" problem again, usually because it really is a problem. 2) People jump on the person (inadvertently hard perhaps) who brings it up. 3) The person goes to the archives to find this discussion and can't do it due to the inadequecies of the mailing list search and browse features 4) Said person goes away frustrated 5) Go to 1 Meanwhile the original problem never gets solved nor even (useful) mindshare thrown at it. Am I flaming about this? No. Do I want some way to solve these (and other) problems without irritating everyone who's already fla...er discussed this before? YES, and there needs to be a faster way to get up to speed with these legacy discussions. A couple examples off the top of my head of these kinds of discussions are: * naming of -stable * why Xfree86 v4 wasn't in FreeBSD (until now) All this dovetails with something I expressed earlier, with regards to annotating documentation. Somehow, this community needs to be able to process a certan class of ideas in a format other than linear mailing lists. Perhaps some sort of meta-document is needed which describes how things currently work, and some sort of attachable discussion needs to go with ideas in that document. Perhaps this is the handbook? I don't have a completely clear picture yet. Maybe some of you can help me get one? =) ------ Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< A sample is a sample. Yet nobody would buy my house when I showed them a brick from it. - Mulla Nasrudin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message