Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 6 Jan 2006 22:20:11 +1030
From:      "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
To:        Jo Rhett <jrhett@svcolo.com>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, current <current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Fast releases demand binary updates.. (Was: Release schedule for	2006 )
Message-ID:  <200601062220.13417.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <20060106112329.GG54324@svcolo.com>
References:  <43A266E5.3080103@samsco.org> <200601061120.14707.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20060106112329.GG54324@svcolo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart17759608.RyVHtf6x3N
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 21:53, Jo Rhett wrote:
> > you mean? Are you claiming someone from (or claiming to be from core)
> > said "Don't do this, we won't allow it"? If so, can you supply proof?
>
> I used to write a lot of patches to freebsd.  I used to submit a lot of b=
ug
> reports.  I've found over the years that unless you have gotten
> pre-agreement from others about the nature of the patch, or agreement to
> focus on the problem, neither one amounts to a hill of beans.  Installati=
on
> problems that existed in 4.4 are still alive and well in the 6.0 installe=
r,
> for example.

<shrugs>
That is not my experience.

> How FreeBSD "works" is by getting someone in the core team to care about
> the issue.  No amount of problem reports, patches or code will generate
> even a millimeter of movement otherwise.

You are mistaking core@ for developers@..
Like I've said before, core is largely irrelevant in FreeBSD when it comes =
to=20
deciding what stuff gets added.

> I've written far too much code for various freebsd problems, and it has
> always been ignored.  Not rejected, ignored.  Unless someone with commit
> rights thinks it's a good idea, writing code for freebsd is a waste of
> time.

Yes.. and those people AREN'T CORE. Please, please stop confusing your term=
s,=20
it makes the discussion much harder than it needs to be.

You ARE right if what you mean is that "We need interested committers to he=
lp=20
thrash out a system for making upgrades simpler".

I imagine there are a few committers interested, but I'd say you need to as=
k=20
the right way first..

=2D-=20
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
  -- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C

--nextPart17759608.RyVHtf6x3N
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQBDvll15ZPcIHs/zowRAmo8AJ9ocN73YZijfX5s6c0b5FL4AhIKgwCeIL4j
oC06ZOPLwTvNrCdlTzdm/i8=
=hJ81
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart17759608.RyVHtf6x3N--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200601062220.13417.doconnor>