From owner-freebsd-bugs Thu Jul 29 12:18:18 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from dt011n65.san.rr.com (dt011n65.san.rr.com [204.210.13.101]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7886F150EF; Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:18:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Received: from gorean.org (master [10.0.0.2]) by dt011n65.san.rr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA23630; Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:15:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Message-ID: <37A0A866.43A71593@gorean.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:15:50 -0700 From: Doug Organization: Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Fumerola Cc: Tim Vanderhoek , green@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bin/11121: w(1) cannot handle more than one user on command line References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Bill Fumerola wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Doug wrote: > > Ok, how would you suggest that we implement a system where PR > > fixes get MFC'ed on a more regular schedule? What we really want to avoid > > is having things updated in the dreaded "super-commit" fashion that tends > > to happen right before a -Release is cut. By MFC'ing in smaller bits over > > a longer period of time things get tested better, -Release's are less > > traumatic, and everyone is happier. > > > > Any ideas? > > A new state in GNATS would seem smart. That got my vote when this was discussed last year. I even think there was a sort of consensus about it, however implementation got lost in the heather. Doug To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message