Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 14:21:14 -0700 From: Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org> To: Dag-Erling =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, Mark R V Murray <mark@grondar.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r274739 - head/sys/mips/conf Message-ID: <1416691274.1147.339.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> In-Reply-To: <86egsvueqk.fsf@nine.des.no> References: <201411200552.sAK5qnXP063073@svn.freebsd.org> <20141120084832.GE24601@funkthat.com> <AE8F2D30-7F91-4C90-B79A-D99857D8AED8@grondar.org> <20141121092245.GI99957@funkthat.com> <1416582989.1147.250.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <026FEB8A-CA8C-472F-A8E4-DA3D0AC44B34@grondar.org> <1416596266.1147.290.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <F017033A-B761-4435-A7F8-264D2F4662A0@grondar.org> <1416598889.1147.297.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <86egsvueqk.fsf@nine.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 2014-11-22 at 22:06 +0100, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org> writes: > > The arrogance in the way you talk down to me about my right and abili= ty > > to decide these things is mind-boggling. It's clear you're going to = do > > whatever you want, so I guess I'll just shut up. >=20 > With all due respect, Ian, you've been very difficult to work with, not > least because any attempt to have an adult discussion with you on this > subject ends with you saying "you clearly don't want to listen so I'll > just go away". It's simply not true, but repeat it often enough and it > will *become* true. >=20 > We now have automatic unblocking back (which is *precisely* what you I noted that in one of my replies, and also said that it appeared from this thread that that was considered a temporary action which would be undone. Nobody contradicted that until now. > wanted), and I am willing to allow a tunable to turn it off, but I will > not allow disabling it by default, because I believe it is better than That's all I ever asked for, from day one, and this is the first non-negative response to it I can remember. I never asked for it to be disabled by default. I asked for a knob. I asked for it to possibily take multiple knobs, or anything else reasonable to make it difficult to do the wrong thing by accident. When Adrian started talking about a somewhat different need, I went out of my way to point out that his request was different than mine, just to make sure there was no confusion about any sort of enabled-by-default. So yes, maybe my tone has been a bit strident. That tends to happen when you keep saying one thing and the responses you get are as if you had said something else completely. -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1416691274.1147.339.camel>