From owner-cvs-all  Wed Dec  9 22:49:16 1998
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA09920
          for cvs-all-outgoing; Wed, 9 Dec 1998 22:49:16 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from fast.cs.utah.edu (fast.cs.utah.edu [155.99.212.1])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA09914
          for <committers@hub.freebsd.org>; Wed, 9 Dec 1998 22:49:15 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from vanmaren@fast.cs.utah.edu)
Received: (from vanmaren@localhost)
	by fast.cs.utah.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA26703
	for committers@hub.freebsd.org; Wed, 9 Dec 1998 23:49:08 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 23:49:08 -0700 (MST)
From: Kevin Van Maren <vanmaren@fast.cs.utah.edu>
Message-Id: <199812100649.XAA26703@fast.cs.utah.edu>
To: committers@hub.freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Swat teams (was: problem reports)
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

> Yes, having a patch makes things much easier, but as Bruce
> will argue, just because there is a patch doesn't mean it is
> correct.

Hey, I'll agree with that!  I wouldn't commit a patch I didn't
understand.  Being slow with PRs is better than blindly applying
every patch that comes in, but being slow isn't exactly something
to strive for.

So, does -committers usually get this much volume?  If so, I
don't think I'd want to join ;-)  Hard to believe my little
complaint caused so much volume, with it all about PRs not
getting fixed, not about the PRs I wanted fixing...

Kevin

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message