From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 15 21:49:11 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B89616A417; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:49:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 348A813C48E; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:49:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0835746D73; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:49:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 22:49:10 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Poul-Henning Kamp In-Reply-To: <2571.1192483864@critter.freebsd.dk> Message-ID: <20071015224034.B9055@fledge.watson.org> References: <2571.1192483864@critter.freebsd.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Scott Long , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Alexander Leidinger , cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Joao Barros , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Wilko Bulte Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc Makefile sensorsd.conf src/etc/defaults rc.conf src/etc/rc.d Makefile sensorsd src/lib/libc/gen sysctl.3 src/sbin/sysctl sysctl.8 sysctl.c src/share/man/man5 rc.conf.5 src/share/man/man9 Makefile sensor_attach.9 src/sys/conf f X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:49:11 -0000 On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <20071015221917.X9055@fledge.watson.org>, Robert Watson writes: > >>> Wait please. It was on the ides list before the soc and during the soc. >>> There where links to an overview and to source files. >> >> This is precisely why I've been concerned about the way things get randomly >> put in the ideas list--something I've e-mailed you about many times. >> People take it to represent a list of things we want, and frequently, items >> on the list are not things that we want. Sometimes they are things that >> should be looked at, and perhaps used or perhaps not, but often they are >> things apparently hoovered up off a mailing list without thinking about >> whether they are actually a good idea, and without talking to developers >> who have expertise in the area they relate to. > > This is exactly why I stopped maintaining the JKH list long time ago. I don't object to the idea of an ideas list -- just to one in which we put things on it that we don't want, and to one that we use to justify committing something even though we don't want it. The benefits for our SoC students and other potential new committers are significant if we do it right, but this it not the first time someone has been burned by virtue of picking up a task on the ideas list, doing it, and then discovering that the "idea" was not a simply a "todo" item. "It was on the ideas list" should never be a justification to commit something, and we need to make sure people looking at such a list understand that. Vis the recent comment on the OpenBSD BIO framework idea -- if our key RAID developers don't think it's the right way to solve a problem, then why is it on the list? We only hurt ourselves, getting into precisely the current sort of situation, by doing this. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge