Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 15:57:31 -0500 (EST) From: Dev Chanchani <dev@trifecta.com> To: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, jkh@time.cdrom.com, freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sendmail 8.8.4 questions... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.961210155718.10896B-100000@www.trifecta.com> In-Reply-To: <l03010904aecbef073392@[208.2.87.4]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I think you should go get a copy of BSDI and shaddup. On Wed, 4 Dec 1996, Richard Wackerbarth wrote: > >Shut up and get outta my way, since all you are doing is *hindering* the > >process of making things better. > > > >You *ARE* part of the problem, and not the solution. > > Yes, I am a problem because I am not satisfied with the posturing that you > make in your own little sandbox. If you want your system to be taken > seriously, you need to recognize that there is more to a system that just > the code. I happen to think that a major problem in acceptance is > (perceived) (lack of) "customer support". Jordan has made great progress in > making installation more "user friendly". We also need to make sure that we > address other needs of the "users". > Particularly if the intention is to target the commercial user rather than > the home hobbyist, you must remember that they need STABLE, SUPPORTED > systems. > > What you call a "release" has, by industry standards, had virtually no testing. > It needs to be field tested for some time before being placed into critical > service. In the interim, the users STILL need a SUPPORTED system. > > >ps. Apologies to those folks who think I'm being a bit harsh. I've just > >had it with Richard's 'pie-in-the-sky' solutions that never materialize > >that awlays seem to involve more of my time and none of his. > > On the contrary, I proposed that this effort involve participants other > than the "developers". However, it is your wish to restrict the "FreeBSD > organization" to your closed group which places the burden on yourselves. > > You (conveniently) forget that just a few messages back, I offered to do > the additional testing to assure that the changes going into 2.2 were also > appropriate for 2.1. > > I am both willing and able to support the source tree for 2.1 separate from > the main cvs tree. However, I do not think that is really a good idea. If > FreeBSD is to gain from any effort to support the reliable aging system, it > MUST be done under the banner of the organization. If that is done, I feel > it only prudent that the master copy of things be kept by the organization > in a unified manner. > > And you have now convinced me that, WRT the build system, your offer to > consider a "proof of concept" rather than the full thing was insincere and > any effort that I have made toward developing that demonstration has been > wasted effort. :-( > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.961210155718.10896B-100000>