On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 09:53:06PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > We used to have a principle that commit bits were granted to individuals > > > on their individual merit, not simply because they represented a vendor > > > and were paid to work on drivers for that vendor's hardware. > > Are you implying that Jack has no merit? That's an unfortunate > > assertion. What evidence do you have to support that? > > It is you who implied rather strongly that Jack is neither more nor less > than an Intel representative. You spoke of "lecturing a vendor" when > all Erik did was point out or own rules to a *committer*. > > > > We also used to have a principle that changes should be tested > > > before being committed, especially to -STABLE. > > I guess you missed that part where Jack said that the changes had > > undergone extensive testing. > > I guess you missed the part where his commit broke the tinderbox, > because he clearly did not test the DEVICE_POLLING case.
In Jack's defense that particular problem was apparently beacuse a 7.x interface was left in the code (bus_setup_intr(9) takes one more argument in 7.x than it does in 6.x.) That would not have been caught by having the code go into -CURRENT first. -- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
