At 6:55 PM -0800 2/26/02, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > (1) The timeout begins when contention occurs, of the lock has been
>> declared. This means that if you seriously intend to do some work,
>> you can say "I'm going to do the work", but you don't risk losing the
>> lock until someone comes to you and says "Hey did you ever...".
>Locks shouldn't be unilateral and they shouldn't last more that the
>amount of time that it takes to import a change and get it stable.
>i.e. maybe a week or so at most. Someone used KSE-II as an example..
>They said I had a 2 month lock (??) I don't know where they got that
>idea from.. I had a vague concensus that maybe things may be broken
>for a DAY OR TWO. while the commit was happenning. I the end it was
That would be me...
I meant "lock" in the sense of expecting no one to make any major
changes in the same area of code. I seem to remember you asking for
such a "lock" (to use the term loosely) in July, and the KSE work
going in around August or so. My memory is admittedly vague. My
point was you explicitly asked for permission to go ahead with that
work, even though (at the time) we were shooting for a release date
I don't mean the period of time that -current was actually unstable,
but the amount of time that other developers were asked to stay away
from a major section of code.
Garance Alistair Drosehn = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message