From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Dec 8 16:04:55 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA01630 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 16:04:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from ns.mt.sri.com (sri-gw.MT.net [206.127.105.141]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA01607 for ; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 16:04:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@mt.sri.com) Received: from mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by ns.mt.sri.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA24982; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 16:45:10 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@rocky.mt.sri.com) Received: by mt.sri.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA13824; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 16:45:08 -0700 Date: Mon, 8 Dec 1997 16:45:08 -0700 Message-Id: <199712082345.QAA13824@mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: dg@root.com Cc: Mikael Karpberg , nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [hackers:] Architectural advice needed In-Reply-To: <199712082331.PAA24811@implode.root.com> References: <199712082228.XAA00434@ocean.campus.luth.se> <199712082331.PAA24811@implode.root.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.29 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >> just 'implements' nowadays. I think it *could* fulfill its purpose if > >> it was actually promoted/used. I would have used it in the past if I > >> thought it would be monitored, although it wasn't. Could we consider it > >> 'back in use' for questions such as Julians? > > > >It's still closed, though, no? And that's a lot less fun for people that are > >interested in, if not joining the debate, at least read it. If it's going > >to go back in use, could it at least be possible to join it "read only", > >if you are the "mere mortal" that most of us are? > > Thr original purpose of the list was for coordinating architectural > direction between the BSD old guard and FreeBSD. This simply didn't work > as intended so it should be deleted. Just because it didn't work *then* for co-ordinating stuff with CSRG doesn't mean it couldn't work *now* for co-ordinating FreeBSD stuff that happens currently between just a couple folks. Nate