Mike Barcroft wrote:
> [Discussion related to the root of the thread, rather than my message,
> removed.]
> I see you are not interested in doing this.
> No longer can Terry blame CVS, P4, Gnats, our two seperate branches of
> development, FreeBSD developers, or the color of the sky; Terry can be
> attributed to be the sole reason why these outside projects have never
> been integrated into FreeBSD.

Apparently, you weren't paying attention to the
"too dangerous" part of the discussion, which would,
by definition, keep my examples from getting committed.

FWIW: I specifically chose my examples so that 3 out
of the 4 of them were complex enough that they would
hit the review wall.

Also FWIW: Just because I came up with the examples
does not mean they are my code.  They are code that was
current at the time the project was made aware of the
patches, and the only thing missing from your 5 step
process was the review and commit.

Check the list archives for them, if you don't believe

I'm amazed that I now suddenly own the integration of
all forward looking projects into FreeBSD where the only steps
necessary for their integration are "4) review, 5) commit".

If that's the case, I hereby approve, after having reviewed
it, John Baldwin's proc-locking patch.

As my "mentor", I'm sure you'll commit it, now, right?

If anyone else wants their code that's in P4, and not
CVS, reviewed and committed to CVS, speak up, because Mike
Barcroft is here to help you.

PS: Grow up: you can't dismiss all my examples by waving
an "it's Terry's problem" wand at them.  There's a real
process problem here that needs addressing.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to