From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Nov 13 23:40:16 1995
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id XAA05675
          for current-outgoing; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:40:16 -0800
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id XAA05668
          for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:40:14 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA26349; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:39:39 -0800
To: Charles Henrich <henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu>
cc: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams), freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ISP state their FreeBSD concerns 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 13 Nov 1995 20:26:20 EST."
             <199511140126.UAA00419@crh.cl.msu.edu> 
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:39:39 -0800
Message-ID: <26347.816334779@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> I find it hard to believe it would have taken longer than the 3 or 4 months i
ts
> been since he posted them.  Even if there truly was no time to review the
> patches for 2.1 since then, would it have not made sense to pull them into 2.
2
> to get the ball rolling?

See my previous comments.  Say you do pull them into 2.2.  Now who's
going to LOOK at them?  We have 10 emergency patients sitting in the
waiting room and only 2 doctors on duty.  Which 8 patients should we
let die first?

					Jordan