Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 08:23:52 +0200 From: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 2nd call for reviews and tests: buf->bio patch Message-ID: <20000404082352.G21619@daemon.ninth-circle.org> In-Reply-To: <200004031751.KAA60287@apollo.backplane.com>; from dillon@apollo.backplane.com on Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 10:51:49AM -0700 References: <22448.954783492@critter.freebsd.dk> <200004031751.KAA60287@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-On [20000403 20:05], Matthew Dillon (dillon@apollo.backplane.com) wrote: > >:When I mailed arch@ about this change I got no response from anybody >:but Bruce. >: >:I talked to Kirk about it in Malmø and got his approval. >: >:This is not unplanned. >: >:This is also not untested, I have two complete prototypes behind me. >: >:It is regretable that vinum was broken, and I hope that it is fixed >:with Alfreds changes, one can't win 100% all the time. >: >:Your time would be more productively used by reviewing and testing >:the patch at http://phk.freebsd.dk/misc than by preaching. >: >:As to the debugging of the malloc/free issue in vinum, Sørens suggestion >:to use releng4 sounds downright sensible to me, and I suggest you do >:that. > > I don't think these excuses come close to justifying your commits > or your timing. With all due respect, in some cases it does. -arch: This list was SUPPOSED to be used for this sorta thing. That only bde mailed him and commented, well, tough luck, that's your loss guys. That's what peer review is about. -Kirk: You paraded often enough about Kirk's approval to do things Matt, that point is not valid IMHO. -prototype: I looked at the prototypes and they looked, in my novice eyes, more sane then what we have now. -vinum: with all respect, but with newbus, almost ALL driver-writers had to bite the sour apple in order to get their drivers ready for the changes. And like Poul-Henning and Soren say, use a source tree that isn't cvsupped with these changes to chase your bugs and fix them and then look at the future again. Also, when IS the right time? Judging time and again when somebody does some earthshaking thing with some old existing API's everybody shouts nay and boo and hiss, whilst in fact providing little if nothing productive output in order to substantiate why people are against that change. Like I said in another mail, this is CURRENT, things are expected to break. You want stability of API's, go 3-STABLE. You want a somewhat stable environment, go 4-STABLE. 5 is bleeding edge, have your bandages ready. -- Jeroen Ruigrok vd Werven/Asmodai asmodai@[wxs.nl|bart.nl|freebsd.org] Documentation nutter/C-rated Coder BSD: Technical excellence at its best The BSD Programmer's Documentation Project <http://home.wxs.nl/~asmodai>; Veni, Vidi, Vici... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000404082352.G21619>