Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 17:32:26 -0600 From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) To: jrhett@svcolo.com, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, current <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Fast releases demand binary updates.. (Was: Release schedule for 2006) Message-ID: <20060105233226.GC17890@soaustin.net> In-Reply-To: <200512231136.12471.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> References: <43A266E5.3080103@samsco.org> <43AB1E65.2030501@mac.com> <20051222221202.GM39174@svcolo.com> <200512231136.12471.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20060105092448.GH1358@svcolo.com> <20060105184147.GD69162@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Jo Rhett wrote this message on Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 01:24 -0800: > Sorry. As said before, the topic is always struck down and nobody from > core has ever stood up to say "we'll support this". I don't know whose on > core this week, nor will I at any given time. This information is publicly available if you want to do the research. > I just know that core has either struck it down or been Silent. The latter is an entirely different case from the former, and you've been claiming core has done the former. This, and the above, tell me that you're not interested in checking your facts before making an accusation. (And, as well, that you do not even understand the role the core plays in the project. Hint: it is not primarily technical in nature.) Because of this, it's more much difficult for me to give your technical arguments as much credence as I would otherwise. As a final observation, FreeBSD is rarely advanced by postings of the form 'FreeBSD must do XYZ'. This is primarily because volunteers work on whatever they feel interested in doing with their free time, rather than the priorities anyone else sets for them. But your mileage may vary. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060105233226.GC17890>