From owner-freebsd-current Wed Oct 23 14:19:26 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA12102 for current-outgoing; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:19:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA12097 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:19:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id OAA10473; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:16:51 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199610232116.OAA10473@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Possibility? To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:16:51 -0700 (MST) Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <199610230719.JAA23418@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Oct 23, 96 09:19:42 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > Anyway, the core team is supposed to consider BSD4.4 source bases > > other than FreeBSD and incorporate useful changes without my help. > > The core team is supposed to coordinate the work. Nothing less, but > nothing more. So if, for instance, the BSD 4.4-Lite2 code is not being actively integrated, how can it possibly result in a coordination conflict? I think the core team sets direction and policy, as well as self-sechduling core team members as engineering resources, doesn't it? I mean, otherwise there would be no reason for not integrating patches, even if they were not fully understood by some core team member or other? Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.