Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 19 Feb 2002 00:34:06 -0800
From:      Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
To:        Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
Cc:        Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, jhb@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: John Balwdin's proc-locking patch 
Message-ID:  <20020219083406.B351E3A9A@overcee.wemm.org>
In-Reply-To: <20020219070428.GF12136@elvis.mu.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> * Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> [020218 22:27] wrote:
> 
> >     It is totally unecessary to accumulate so many easily-made-incremental
> >     changes off-tree and, in fact, I believe it to be detrimental to the
> >     project.  It locks up large areas of code for long periods of time 
> >     and creates both a synchronization hassle (even with P4) and a
> >     debugging nightmare when finally committed due to the sheer number
> >     of changes involved.  
> [snip]
> > 
> >     That is my position.
> 
> I've felt the same way for a while.

Nobody is disputing that.  It would have been better if John had committed
it piecemeal, but it didn't work out that way.  I doubt he'll fall for this
trap again.

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5


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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020219083406.B351E3A9A>