Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:27:42 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> To: Ryan Sommers <ryans@gamersimpact.com> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Release criteria for libkse -> libpthread switch? Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040107212704.13166D-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <1073527914.650.41.camel@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Ryan Sommers wrote: > On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 19:39, Robert Watson wrote: > > My leaning is we should throw the switch to libkse sooner rather than > > later to improve exposure, even though it's not quite feature complete. > > It was basically an accident of timing and intent that we didn't get to > > the rename before 5.2. For one thing, it will get applications to start > > linking against libpthread sooner. However, if we're going to throw the > > switch, it would be good to know the features aren't far behind :-). > > My only concern with this is that it might cause some sort of delay in > getting to 5-STABLE. I think, as I'm sure most would agree, that > achieving a 5-STABLE is the next major milestone for the project. One > that, from the lists, some think is somewhat overdue. On the other hand, M:N threading is one of the big "5-STABLE" features, so if we continue to consider it one of those features, moving to it as the default is a better thing to do sooner than later. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040107212704.13166D-100000>