On 01-Feb-2003 Julian Elischer wrote:
I'm working on backing out david's patch.
Part of his megacommit was a patch that should ahve been separatly
handled.
I have split it out..
Can people have a look at it and see if it makes sense.
http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/lock.diff
still no comments?
this patch seems to be working, but a review from another developer
would be good.. particularly re: the point mentionned..
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
I'm working on backing out david's patch.
Part of his megacommit was a patch that should ahve been
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
lian Elischer writes:
still no comments?
Julian, you sent this out a few hours ago, after people had spent
a lot of time and getting quite frustrated trying to get you to
DTRT with your mentee's inappropriate commit.
If people are sick and tired of you right
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
lian Elischer writes:
still no comments?
Julian, you sent this out a few hours ago, after people had spent
a lot of time and getting quite frustrated trying to get you to
DTRT with your mentee's inappropriate
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ju
lian Elischer writes:
Oh shut up Poul-Henning.
Try to remain civil here Julian :-)
I tried to explain the situation to you, to make sure you would not be
tempted to do rush something which needs to take the time things take.
I know I'm on your shit list, and
At 10:47 AM -0800 2003/02/01, Julian Elischer wrote:
still no comments?
this patch seems to be working, but a review from another developer
would be good.. particularly re: the point mentionned..
You first announced the split-out patch at Sat, 1 Feb 2003
02:59:24 -0800 (PST). The
:02:59:24 -0800 (PST). The date/time stamp on the message that I am
:replying to is Sat, 1 Feb 2003 10:47:44 -0800 (PST). That's
:something around seven hours and forty-five minutes, unless I have
:miscalculated.
:
: Is it really normal to expect replies within that kind of a time
On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Brad Knowles wrote:
At 10:47 AM -0800 2003/02/01, Julian Elischer wrote:
still no comments?
this patch seems to be working, but a review from another developer
would be good.. particularly re: the point mentionned..
[...]
If I am wrong and it is
At 6:27 PM -0800 2003/02/01, Matthew Dillon wrote:
Well, it is an active conversation/thread. Either people care enough
to stay involved or they don't.
But don't people have to sleep sometime? Shouldn't we allow for that?
I mean, I can understand impatience, too. I get
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Brad Knowles wrote:
At 10:47 AM -0800 2003/02/01, Julian Elischer wrote:
still no comments?
this patch seems to be working, but a review from another developer
would be good.. particularly re: the point
Brad Knowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 6:27 PM -0800 2003/02/01, Matthew Dillon wrote:
Well, it is an active conversation/thread. Either people care enough
to stay involved or they don't.
But don't people have to sleep sometime? Shouldn't we allow for that?
Real
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Mike Barcroft wrote:
Brad Knowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 6:27 PM -0800 2003/02/01, Matthew Dillon wrote:
Well, it is an active conversation/thread. Either people care enough
to stay involved or they don't.
But don't people have to sleep
12 matches
Mail list logo
