From owner-freebsd-smp Tue Jun 20 16: 7:39 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from thelab.hub.org (nat204.182.mpoweredpc.net [142.177.204.182]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8632237B760 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:07:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: from localhost (scrappy@localhost) by thelab.hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA04499; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 20:03:10 -0300 (ADT) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) X-Authentication-Warning: thelab.hub.org: scrappy owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 20:03:10 -0300 (ADT) From: The Hermit Hacker To: Warner Losh Cc: mjacob@feral.com, Poul-Henning Kamp , Matthew Dillon , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP discussion moving to freebsd-smp In-Reply-To: <200006201902.NAA71105@harmony.village.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, Warner Losh wrote: > : > >Okay, I'll drop working on FreeBSD until next year then. 'so long. > : > > : > Thanks! [*] > > So what if I had said it PHK? I think this "we'll ram it down your > throats for the good of the project" attitude is extremely bad. > > I want to continue to do NEWCARD work, and that work is done in - > current. if -current is so unstable that I cannot do the work for a > long period of time, the only other real choice I'd have is to do it > in -stable and MFS -> current once the dust has sttled, and that's a > big no no. Which one would be harder to merge back into -current from a branch? Your NEWCARD work or the SMP work? Why not make a branch for NEWCARD and when the SMP work is declared stable, *you* spend the effort of merging it back in? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message