David O'Brien wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 12:34:08PM -0500, Robert Watson wrote: > > Hmm. The argument for A is, I think, is a lot stronger than for J, since > > it comes without the performance impact, and you can actually generate > > useful diagnostics. I would be fine with leaving A in the developer > > snapshot. > > Lets back up and clarify RE's goals for the DP#1. Turning off all of our > debugging options and appearing to make this benchmark ready were not > part of what I [thought I] heard at the Kernel Summit at BSDcon.
I didn't hear that either, and it's starting to make me a little nervous. It's bad enough that the first DP will be almost wholely unlike what the 5.0-Release will actually look like, now it seems that its value will be further reduced by making it very different from -Current of the same time period. I see two major problems with that. First, it does little good for us to release something to a wider audience if it's not going to be what and how we're actually trying to test. The other major problem is that I really don't think many users are going to stick with the DP versions. When users complain about bugs in the DP's, they are going to be pointed to -Current. Then they are going to have to experience the learning curve anyway. I think a better solution would be to ship the DP's with the same defaults as -Current of the same vintage, and educate the users as to how to remove some of the debugging features. As others have said, this is supposed to be a DEVELOPER'S preview. Until we get closer to something that looks like a release, leaving the bar set a little higher benefits both us and our potential consumers. Doug -- "We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory." - George W. Bush, President of the United States State of the Union, January 28, 2002 Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message