From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Apr  5 17:15:19 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA27779
          for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA27740
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:15:09 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from toor@dyson.iquest.net)
Received: (from root@localhost)
	by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA01657;
	Sun, 5 Apr 1998 19:13:15 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from toor)
From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net>
Message-Id: <199804060013.TAA01657@dyson.iquest.net>
Subject: Re: Softupdate for 2.2.6?
In-Reply-To: <199804052201.PAA27114@usr05.primenet.com> from Terry Lambert at "Apr 5, 98 10:01:33 pm"
To: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert)
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 19:13:15 -0500 (EST)
Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it, frank@our.domaintje.com,
        tcobb@staff.circle.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL38 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> > No implication of centralized control over third party patches was
> > intended.  I am simply saying that each task is hard enough to do that
> > it's highly unlikely that the questioner will see such patches
> > released.
> > 
> > > > Q. Will any of the following features ever be in 2.2.x, even as
> > > >    3rd party patches?
> > > > 
> > > > A. 1. Soft Updates:  No.
> > > >    2. CAM: No.
> > > >    3. SMP: No (you didn't ask, but I figured while I was making
> > > >       a list... :-)
> > > 
> > > since when is anyone in control of third party patches ?
> > > (i mean except licensing restrictions). If some good soul wants to do
> > > the backport and provide a patchfile, i don't see any problem with
> > > that. I understand that you are being realistic and "No" means "I don't
> > > think we'll ever find someone willing to do the backport"
> 
> If patches were provided, say for soft updates, would they be
> integrated, or would thy have to remain "third party"?
> 
IMO, we have already hacked 2.2.X too much.  It is time to use it
as purely a stability release only.

John

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