Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 19:54:55 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: terry@lambert.org, phk@critter.dk.tfs.com, ache@nagual.ru, dyson@FreeBSD.ORG, bde@zeta.org.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ufs lock panic in -current Message-ID: <199704030254.TAA15269@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <18686.860030332@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Apr 2, 97 05:18:52 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> If you're going to continue with the slippery conversational gambits > then I'm here to tell you that we're not going to get anywhere at all > with this. Oh sure, we can continue to fence and parry and try to > impress everyone on -current with our debating skills, but it's not > going to get us any closer to determining the Real Truth(tm) about why > Terry's code is not getting in the tree. Julian has my namei/nameifree and "EXCLUDE" NDINIT() op redundant code reduction changes. Feel free to commit them. I just sent you (posted) some Logical Name support code. Feel free to commit that. > You know darn well that I'm not asking you to be a Coding K-Mart just > as you know darn well why you don't have commit privileges (or > "citizenship", to use your term) after 2 years, this wide-eyed "gosh I > just don't know what their problem is" act starting to get just a mite > stale. I did not use the euphamism "citizenship" to refer to "commit priviledges", I used it to refer to you not applying the same citeria to me as you do to other developers. You keep suggesting that I should upload my complete patches for my working code set (which are based on a snapshot from June of 1994). These patches were already deemed "unsuitable". I respectfully suggest you take the patches that I have updated to meet your standards of suitability, and forget about those which you deem "unsuitable". I have already shown a willingness to meet your criteria, and there is no need for you to publically appear willing to accept patches which you have already rejected (since my patches applied against the tree date specified applied cleanly and would result in the same source tree you are suggesting that I upload). > The power to change all of this has always rested squarely in > your hands, and I've taken out time and energy on more than one > occasion to send you multi-page letters describing exactly how things > work and what we expect from someone who wants to work on FreeBSD's > kernel and general infrastructure in the areas you're wishing to get > involved in. These letters did no good whatsoever. Because you have failed to provide a set of criteria which I can apply to a design to determine if the results of the design would meet the criteria. Richard and others have found themselves in the same boat. > I've pointed to > numerous counter-examples to your claims about how The System Itself > Must Be Flawed If It Can't Accomodate A Lambert, demonstrating time > and again that numerous *other* developers, coming along well after > your arrival, had walked easily over the very same bar you were > claiming was above head-height and unreasonably placed. I have never made the flaw claims in the way you state. I have made organizational flaw claims where I believed they were valid. I have made no "bar" claims except where you were not uniformly applying, or simply not disclosing (making it impossible to judge uniformity of application) your standards. > You continue to contend that we're the unreasonable ones here as > even more committers join the project each day. While I was a USL employee, I specifically *declined* commit priviledges. Then you took the *ALPHA* SYSINIT() code and integrated, complaining bitterly about my use of goto's in "production code", and marking me a coding pariah ever since. > Face it, Terry, you're a stubborn cuss and you want the project to > revolve around you, you have no interest in being a sattelite in > someone else's orbit or you would have *adapted* to team player status > in the very same ways that the other 70+ people currently on the CVS > committers list have. This is total and utter bullshit. I could care less if the project revolved around me, you, or Uranus. All I care is that the project be the best project it can be, and meet its stated "research platform" goals because I would find a research platform that actually met those goals useful. I would like to do SMP, FS, and kernel multithreading research. The project as it stands is unsuitable for that task because you do not meet your own stated goals. Everything is a "work in progress" and you never reach a useful destination. The patches I have submitted so far (and the code which I have submitted and which you *HAVE* integrated) are nothing to me. They are changes necessary to make FreeBSD as useful research vehicle, nothing more. The utility of the changes are independent of whether I ustilize this vehicle, or others do so: their value is independent of "Accommodate A Lambert". Yes, I would prefer that I not have to drag my changes along from one of your revisions to the next. But I have suitable cuts of the FreeBSD code which will allow me to pursue the avenues of research which I want to pursue at the moment. I am content to submit changes in piecemeal fashion so that when I discover the next avenue I wish to pursue, FreeBSD will be ready for it. > You would have been working to establish bonds of trust rather > than dictating from the pulpit, Bogus and argumentative. > or maybe you would have been just slightly more strategic in > taking over an obscure utility and getting commit privs on > that basis s/strategic/dishonest/ s/basis/false pretense/ I, sir, have a bit more honor than that. > You > could have done any number of things, in fact, but you didn't because > success at *joining* wasn't really what you had in mind - you just > wanted to get close enough so that the occasional thrown rock would > have a better chance of scoring, maybe, damned if I understand your > actual motivation here. :-) This is because you engage in amateur psychology, under the pretense that we are "fencing" with "slippery conversational gambits", rather than *reading* what I have *stated* are my motivations. There was no need for you to cause this discussion to deteriorate into a public head-bashing instead of taking it to private email, unless your intent was to take the opportunity presented to skewer me on you rapier wit yet again, instead of forthwrightly stating and disposing the issues. Frankly, if you spent as much time in reasoned discussion as you do honing your sword on the bones of your victims, we would no longer have any differences to speak to: we would agree where we agreed, and we would agree to disagree where we did not, and that would be the end of it. > Why not just admit that you like the role of being FreeBSD's Phillis > Shaffley (if I spelled her name correctly) and revel openly in it? > You don't want to become part of the project, that would spoil all > your fun. :-) I am uninterested in being the subject of your head-bashing. If you have an issue with me personally, take it to private email. But drop the "publically wronged hero" act. Review the patches sent Julian. If you don't like them, tell me why so I can correct them and you can commite them, and I will send more patches. If you do like them, commit them, and I will send more patches. This is the very simple formula for getting code out of "A Lambert". Judge the code, not the coder. That's all I've ever wanted from the project as a whole, and it seems to me that it's not an unreasonable expectation. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704030254.TAA15269>