Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 12:43:32 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: merging win95 and nt filesystem changes into msdosfs Message-ID: <199802111943.MAA29812@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199802111933.MAA08353@usr07.primenet.com> References: <199802111749.KAA29341@mt.sri.com> <199802111933.MAA08353@usr07.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert writes: > > > I admit that I have fallen down on providing architecture documents > > > to Nate; however, I have provided him with some information, and the > > > main complaint was that it was too low level and assumed too much > > > knowledge. I have to assume *some* knowledge. > > > > What you provided to me was a political document riddled with 'this is > > why I did this', and what I asked for was a technical document that > > explained *what* you were doing, not why. > > I provided you with a technical document, and you had me cut it > down until it was a fluff piece. No, I had you explain everything to bring it down to an audience that hadn't been doing 'FS design and implementation for over 10 years.' > You either want an architecture document, or you don't. I wanted you to explain the issues behind the FS, so that *I* (and others) could understand the current design, and then understand why it was lacking. > You were > asking me to defend my design decisions in such a way as to give > so little information that they would appear to be bad decisions. No I wasn't. The implication all along was 'FS 101', so that I and a number of other folks could be brought up to speed on FS design, and *AFTER* we understood the basic terminology and such we could be shown the current system and then *AFTER* what was wrong with it and then *AFTER* we could see how your patches fixed it. >From the *beginning* it was called FS 101, not 'Why Terry's patches should go into FreeBSD'. I've heard alot of reason why your patches should go into FreeBSD from a political point of view, and even architectural at times when I took the time to wade through the rhetoric, but not *ONCE* have you explained the basics. Other may understand the basics, but I and many others don't, If you aren't willing to do that, then don't say you are. If you want, I can't dig up the public email you sent saying you were willing to 'teach' people about FS. Teaching != Preaching, and the document you sent me was a sermon, not a technical document. I've got megabytes of FS sermons from you on-line in my mail archives, so I don't need any more. What I am willing to do is 'learn', so that you and I both get something out of this. You get your patches integrated *AND* an advocate. What I get is knowledge on what I consider to be an extremely interesting topic (which I had planned to do my Master's on until my current job stole me away.;) Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802111943.MAA29812>