From owner-freebsd-commit Thu Mar 30 17:05:27 1995 Return-Path: commit-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id RAA06160 for commit-outgoing; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 17:05:27 -0800 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id RAA06145 for cvs-etc-outgoing; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 17:05:24 -0800 Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.1]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id RAA06127; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 17:05:20 -0800 Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin.Root.COM [198.145.90.18]) by Root.COM (8.6.8/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA15339; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 17:05:17 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.11/8.6.5) with SMTP id RAA00403; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 17:05:17 -0800 Message-Id: <199503310105.RAA00403@corbin.Root.COM> X-Authentication-Warning: corbin.Root.COM: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol To: "Rodney W. Grimes" cc: phk@ref.tfs.com (Poul-Henning Kamp), CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-etc@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc/etc.i386 rc.i386 In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 30 Mar 95 16:41:41 PST." <199503310041.QAA07064@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> From: David Greenman Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 17:05:16 -0800 Sender: commit-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> Rod, fine, you're entitled to your opinion. So am I. >> If you don't add it, I will. > >You made a proposal, I said what I thought of it. Others have stated >things about it, and now Poul is makeing the decision :-(. > >Sorry folks, I can't deal with Poul's unilateral dictator ship any longer. Well, it's not any worse than your "unilateral dictator ship" that exposes itself from time to time. >If we can't have decisions made by the group instead of ``what Poul wants'' >I am out of here. It's a two-way street. I find that both of you can be foolishly stubborn at times. Especially annoying is your "If it's not done the way I say then I'm outta here" kind of attitude. I guess there is a lot of personal taste involved in this /etc/rc issue. We have a common goal in FreeBSD: we all want it to work as well as possible. If there isn't any way to do it without a "sysv" /etc/rc scheme, then that's what we'll have to do. The way to solve this issue is by communicating ideas and being willing to accept someone else's if it better solves the problem. We need more research scientists and fewer research dictators. I personally don't like a zillion rc scripts. It makes changing my configuration more difficult for me. ...but the whole issue has relatively low importance and I think the people arguing the issue in a knock-down, drag-out fashion are being childish. -DG