From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 18 19:15:33 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 899B81065673 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:15:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jrhett@netconsonance.com) Received: from mail.netconsonance.com (mail.netconsonance.com [198.207.204.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A61F8FC21 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:15:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jrhett@netconsonance.com) Received: from [172.16.12.8] (covad-jrhett.meer.net [209.157.140.144]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netconsonance.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m8IJBpI2064765; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:11:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jrhett@netconsonance.com) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at netconsonance.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.429 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.429 tagged_above=-999 required=3.5 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1.44, AWL=-0.989] Message-Id: <12944D4C-5243-4EC7-8E1A-04A7735B5AEA@netconsonance.com> From: Jo Rhett To: Dylan Cochran In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v928.1) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:11:51 -0700 References: <1219409496.10487.22.camel@bauer.cse.buffalo.edu> <20080904133604.GB1188@atarininja.org> <47d0403c0809051319r3c82f87bhdb15ce5b0167987a@mail.gmail.com> <2742CAB1-8FF2-425D-A3B6-0658D7DB8F4D@netconsonance.com> <0C2C7E9B-61E3-4720-B76F-4745A3C963DA@netconsonance.com> <658B8861-1E78-4767-8D3D-8B79CC0BD45F@netconsonance.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.928.1) Cc: freebsd-stable Subject: Re: Upcoming Releases Schedule... X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:15:33 -0000 First, thanks for taking the question seriously ;-) On Sep 18, 2008, at 8:47 AM, Dylan Cochran wrote: > problem can't be solved just by extending time with the hope that the > resources will be allocated (no offense to your character, but that No offense taken. I would never suggest we do anything based on hope. In my company's specific case, we'd want to work out the details of exactly how much time we'd commit and what our goal was in committing that time. (besides the obvious "giving back to the community part" which we do anyway) Most of the people that I know personally who are interested in this topic are in similar situations. They would want to discuss the necessary resources to achieve a specific goal, and make specific commitments on the amount of time they could give. I seriously don't know anyone who wanders into any situation saying "oh, maybe if I help out the tooth fairy will visit me!" ;-) That said, I know little about the multi-architecture problems you present here so I can't offer much other commentary, other than: > problem is best solved not by arguing how to work around the symptoms, > but to analyze and solve the parent problems that may not be so > obvious. I suspect this above statement applies to every problem the release and testing teams have. What is necessary to get consensus to even discuss the issues involved? -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness