From owner-freebsd-net Wed Apr 28 23:19:54 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE33B14D45 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 23:19:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA46507; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 23:19:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) To: Archie Cobbs Cc: kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au (Kris Kennaway), net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NetGraph and PPP In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 28 Apr 1999 21:39:01 PDT." <199904290439.VAA89472@bubba.whistle.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 23:19:59 -0700 Message-ID: <46505.925366799@zippy.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Our request to put the netgraph source into the FreeBSD tree has > been rejected (so far)... so the current patch set may need tweaking I'm glad you qualified that - I don't think there's been anything close to wholesale rejection, and I also don't think anyone would mind (too much) if it came in on its own branch at some point. That's supposed to be what CVS is for, after all. > to compile right now. More people using and playing with it might > bring it's demand over the threshold... this is a kind of chicken-and-egg > problem in itself. It is, but I think you're on the right track. Establish a demand and you've established a reason to have it somewhere in the repository. Establish an even greater demand and that will be a rather good argument for bringing it, in some form, into -current at some stage. I think it's all probably a little premature at this stage to talk about things like that, however, and will only raise various red flags if we invert the order of priorities (first users, then -current) here. :-) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message