:In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Dillon writes:
:>:I don't see anything justifying an immediate MFC in this patch. Please
:>:allow the normal waiting period to elapse before you MFC.
:> Unless you can justify a reason for it NOT to be MFC'd immediately, I
:> see no reason to wait for this particular baby.
:Sorry, Matt, that is not the way it works. Unless there is an overriding
:issue, things do not get MFC'ed immediately.
:You have only cited reasons why it would be much more convenient for you
:personally to MFC right away, that is not enough to justify an immediate
:Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
I'm sorry, Poul, but you are going to have to come up with better
reasoning then that.
Not all changes committed to -current require a waiting period before
being MFC'd to stable. Specifically, simple and obvious bug fixes
certainly do not need a waiting period.
My reasoning has nothing to do with what is or is not personally
convenient for me, and frankly your insinuation that it is is rather
insulting. After all, look how long I've waited for the SMP
patches before considering MFCing those? It sure would have been
more convenient for me to MFC them a week after 5.0 stabilized and
before I began work on other patch sets but I didn't. Due to the gravity
of the changes I thought it would be best to give them a really good
test run under 5.x (and note: I received permission from
Jordan to MFC the SMP stuff weeks ago, and even with that permission
I decided to wait).
I do not consider the linux scripting patch to be a major infrastructure
change, I consider it to be a simple bug fix. If you have a functional
issue with the patch I'm all ears. If you disagree with my assessment of
the triviality of the linux scripting patch, then I will ask for a
second opinion from someone who is not quite so jaded in regards to my
commits... say Jordan or DG.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message