From owner-cvs-all Thu Jun 24 7:48:52 1999 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from jade.chc-chimes.com (jade.chc-chimes.com [206.67.97.83]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A070B14CA6; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 07:48:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from billf@jade.chc-chimes.com) Received: from localhost (billf@localhost) by jade.chc-chimes.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA28725; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 10:52:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from billf@jade.chc-chimes.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 10:52:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fumerola To: Eivind Eklund Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Brian Feldman , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c src/sys/i386/isa clock.c In-Reply-To: <19990624130306.G13759@bitbox.follo.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Eivind Eklund wrote: > Actually, old consensus was to use just the account name if the > person(s) that did the submit had an account on freefall, so green is > following the consensus. Agreed. > However, given the spread of (necessary) account deletion, account > renaming and .nofinger files, I'm starting to wonder if we should > either request that people use full e-mail addresses, and/or keep a > web-page with all past and present @FreeBSD.org addresses mapped to > person (and possibly alternative e-mail address for the "past" > entries). > > What do the people think? Perhaps accounts should be 'retired' as opposed to deleted, giving the outgoing committer / account-holder the option to mail root@FreeBSD.org leaving a forwarding address(and changes). - bill fumerola - billf@chc-chimes.com - BF1560 - computer horizons corp - - ph:(800) 252-2421 - bfumerol@computerhorizons.com - billf@FreeBSD.org - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message