Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:11:06 +0000 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>, committers@FreeBSD.ORG, David Greenman <dg@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: sysctl descriptions Message-ID: <199901102211.WAA00696@keep.lan.Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:23:50 MST." <199901101923.MAA12437@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> In message <Pine.BSF.4.05.9901100223440.3712-100000@s204m82.isp.whistle.com> Julian Elischer writes:
> : how does one apply to core for an un-nuking of a nuke by core?
>
> Speaking hypothetically...
>
> First one would try to reach an agreement with that committer (core or
> not). This is always the most desirable way to resolve a conflict
> over source in the tree.
[.....]
This is the only way.
The original commit was a good strategy - best way of measuring how
[un]happy people really are.
Pouls nuke was almost unforgivable - but excusable due to his status
as maintainer.
Someone's already suggested that the commits should stop for a few
days or a week. Then, I think the recent rules indicate that dg
(cc'd) should be the one to make the decision and do any necessary
commits.
> Warner
--
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org> <brian@FreeBSD.org> <brian@OpenBSD.org>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>;
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !
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?199901102211.WAA00696>