From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 2 03:36:37 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAD59106567A for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 03:36:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-yw0-f54.google.com (mail-yw0-f54.google.com [209.85.213.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F178FC19 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 03:36:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yhfs35 with SMTP id s35so9528348yhf.13 for ; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:36:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer :x-gm-message-state; bh=8i/dK6GMZ9vN7Bo+8+npg8P/zkBZG3yi9X0+jsmtaeg=; b=TdvQ90A1hn+9BHvbCLQFeTnJ7pld+lUqqEv3ew0Qgl91jGEpIV03X5hIe2JasdW+5m 96/ruANyTpwT3xNircQvyHN84lqi1KtJC0KgIYLCOjIeQVbiOlP+dIYOlHPUCAtGuLAy eOPezt391TN8b9S+NvS9t4v3y9soL/i4vxM+2b0Z+mNFhLkqrBZv0BYBkv8YVjUiOTGN 7yOGKv2BySnjFhSpbMPHe1btmgjySvxOKKytkuv3t/h4OR2bWRRfc9CtRRXGOdY3QfeM GDArJxRCPhi0EryDl0woPNu5oGdLUYhbm52IuAGEitBrwWTU/jZDeU6bwkLA1zRmyd7y AZ2g== Received: by 10.50.169.73 with SMTP id ac9mr810396igc.29.1343878596277; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:36:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.0.63] (50-78-194-198-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [50.78.194.198]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z3sm14637588igc.7.2012.08.01.20.36.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:36:35 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Warner Losh Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 21:36:26 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <612DA8A3-121E-4E72-9E5B-F3CBA9DEB7F7@bsdimp.com> To: Arnaud Lacombe X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQncxyzEdb21yrPMkXIlCE2HMGPiJm0u+FiVGUXPXCkF7rgVQYxyYkq9cYgD5oFegto8ImpZ Cc: attilio@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Hackers , Adrian Chadd , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: On cooperative work [Was: Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 03:36:37 -0000 On Aug 1, 2012, at 9:28 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > Hi, >=20 > On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >>=20 >> On Aug 1, 2012, at 3:39 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: >>=20 >>> Hi, >>>=20 >>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Adrian Chadd = wrote: >>>> Any interested party is very welcome to approach a developer and = get >>>> added to the developer summits. Plenty of the people at the most >>>> recent developer summit weren't @freebsd.org committers - we had >>>> plenty of representation from companies using FreeBSD. >>>>=20 >>>> If you want to participate, just ask a friendly developer who is = going >>>> to the developer summit to sponsor you in going. You're pleasant in >>>> person, so I'd have no problem sponsoring you if I am going to an >>>> event. :) >>>>=20 >>> I have a very deep, quasi-philosophical, trouble/problem with that >>> whole idea of sponsor-requirement to attend a such meeting. There is >>> just something which does not feel right about it. =46rom my point = of >>> view, this is a matter of common sense, focus is gonna be very = narrow >>> and deeply technical. Attendee should go there only if they think = they >>> will give positive feedback. As for myself, I would not attend a >>> developer meeting on the fiber-channel over infiniband optimization, >>> but would attend a developer meeting on next-generation mbuf. >>>=20 >>> Now, maybe I'll just push the door of some developer meeting I'd be >>> interested in during next BSDCan, and see what happen :-) The = outcome >>> might be interesting to study in a social interaction, prisoner >>> dilemma related, point-of-view. >>=20 >> Given how ridiculously easy it is to get a proper invite, there's not = need to be a jerk just to prove an obscure philosophical point about = attendance. There's plenty of time to do that over the technical points = being discussed. >>=20 > Let me explain my thoughts: I do not recognize the committers > legitimacy to give such invite, and to some extend, I do not recognize > committers self-given legitimacy altogether. This do not mean I'd > praised a structure-less project; quite the opposite actually. > Starting from that, I will certainly not defer to anybody to request > such invite or commit bit. Feel free to kick me out of the meeting > room if you want to; I would have proved my point. I think this proves the point everybody has been saying: you are being = needlessly contrary and confrontational. Warner > Now, if invites are so easy to get, just get rid of it. It's a > worthless, cumbersome item. >=20 > - Arnaud >=20 > ps: please, do not get me wrong, I would apply this policy to anybody > who propose to help.