From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Sep 17 12: 7:25 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from winston.osd.bsdi.com (winston.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.27.229]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F25FC37B422 for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:07:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from winston.osd.bsdi.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by winston.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e8HJ4d609294; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:04:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com) To: Bill Fumerola Cc: Max Khon , stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: I'll be rolling a 4.1.1 release on September 25th In-Reply-To: Message from Bill Fumerola of "Sun, 17 Sep 2000 14:33:40 EDT." <20000917143340.W47559@jade.chc-chimes.com> Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:04:39 -0700 Message-ID: <9290.969217479@winston.osd.bsdi.com> From: Jordan Hubbard Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > There is a direct correlation between the Submitter being ignored by > the Assigned To and the Submitter ignoring the Assigned To. And that doesn't repeal the laws of physics, Bill, even though one may sincerely wish for that ability as they hurtle towards the ground without a parachute. > I don't blame the contributor community for being a little more > then pissed recently for having PRs with full explanations, This isn't an issue of who's pissed or not since that's more or less a constant factor - somebody will always be pissed at somebody for something in this project. The issue here is procedure and whether it works or not, it's all we have until/unless somebody proposes and causes to be instituted a more effective one. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message