Re: CVS commit: src
On 2018/10/23 2:33, Taylor R Campbell wrote: Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 22:28:35 +0900 From: Rin Okuyama I'm really disappointed by this. I do not like the way you got things going (and also I really do not like to write a message like this). I asked you to discuss further before rashly committing it. Didn't I? People actually provided some useful proposals to improve your draft. However, instead of finding a point of agreement, you shutted down discussion one-sidedly: https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-toolchain/2018/10/10/msg003307.html Hi, Rin! There are some good suggestions in that thread, and parts of the thread became a bit of a bike shed. We don't have a formal review process for evolving changes before merging them into HEAD (though we may be moving toward one with hg). Perhaps it would have been better to see another iteration or two of drafts, but (a) bike shed discussions can be long and tedious and can discourage contributions, and (b) we can always revise README.md as a living document -- no need to revert altogether when we can just edit it to improve it. Well, it makes sense on one hand. But, on the other hand, your argument can be very dangerous if it is abused; I really hate an attitude like "Oh, discussion is falling into a bike shed! Let's commit it to shut them up!" Of course, I do understand you are not a person to do such a thing. However, I believe that we must prove it, we do not behave like that, by our daily actions. Otherwise, the community will break up. This is why I'm writing this sequence of unpleasant messages which must "discourage" everyone --- I am really sorry for it. So, what would you like to see improved in the document? - We should definitely mention the relation of the mirror on Github to the master version in CVS. - We can pick a standard style for the capitalization of example architecture names, or pick a different selection of them that doesn't make capitalization difficult, or change all of them. - We can tweak the suggested build.sh incantation, and expand on what the parts of it mean. Personally I use `../obj.amd64' instead of `~/obj'. Yes, we must explain the relation between CVS master and GitHub mirror, at least. Others are minor problems although I feel it better to be consistent with our existing documents. For example, architecture names in http://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/ are not capitalized at all. rin P.S. Maya, why don't you express your opinion in a public ML instead of sending a private massage to me? Rather, let us get back to technical discussions...
Re: CVS commit: src
> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 22:05:27 +0900 > From: Rin Okuyama > > On 2018/10/23 2:33, Taylor R Campbell wrote: > > Perhaps it would have been better to see another iteration or two of > > drafts, but (a) bike shed discussions can be long and tedious and can > > discourage contributions, and (b) we can always revise README.md as a > > living document -- no need to revert altogether when we can just edit > > it to improve it. > > Well, it makes sense on one hand. But, on the other hand, your argument > can be very dangerous if it is abused; I really hate an attitude like > "Oh, discussion is falling into a bike shed! Let's commit it to shut them > up!" Of course, I do understand you are not a person to do such a thing. You make a good point -- it would be bad form to sneak unwelcome changes in under the pretense of avoiding bike sheds. This case seems OK to me because, overall, I felt the response on tech-toolchain was positive -- e.g., https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-toolchain/2018/10/10/msg003296.html https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-toolchain/2018/10/10/msg003303.html The reservations in the tech-toolchain thread were about details, choices of wording, &c., which can always be improved in a living document. > Yes, we must explain the relation between CVS master and GitHub mirror, > at least. Others are minor problems although I feel it better to be > consistent with our existing documents. For example, architecture > names in http://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/ are not capitalized at all. I tweaked the document a bit to just copy the opening paragraph from netbsd.org, and to make a link to the ports page. If you or maya don't like it that way, feel free to put back the particular architecture names. (If anyone wants to put it back, for the particular names, I think we should probably say either (e.g.) `AArch64', `VAX', and `Motorola 68k', or `aarch64', `vax', and `m68k', depending on whether we want to emphasize the branding or the NetBSD code name for each thing.) Feel free to suggest more changes -- it need not be perfect before it can serve a useful purpose, as a living document.
Re: CVS commit: src
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 10:05:27PM +0900, Rin Okuyama wrote: > Well, it makes sense on one hand. But, on the other hand, your argument > can be very dangerous if it is abused; I really hate an attitude like > "Oh, discussion is falling into a bike shed! Let's commit it to shut them > up!" Of course, I do understand you are not a person to do such a thing. > However, I believe that we must prove it, we do not behave like that, by > our daily actions. Otherwise, the community will break up. This is why > I'm writing this sequence of unpleasant messages which must "discourage" > everyone --- I am really sorry for it. I thought there were no big objections to it, as kamil stated something that I read as a withdrawal of his more fundamental objection to markdown & preferring a different style of document, the other complaint was really small (arm64->aarch64) so I changed it without posting a second revision. > Yes, we must explain the relation between CVS master and GitHub mirror, > at least. Others are minor problems although I feel it better to be > consistent with our existing documents. For example, architecture > names in http://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/ are not capitalized at all. Sure. > Maya, why don't you express your opinion in a public ML instead of > sending a private massage to me? Rather, let us get back to technical > discussions... I've had multiple complaints about mentioning details of non-public conversations to a wide audience. Considering it's also the only conduct rule netbsd has, I should probably be extra careful about it.
Re: CVS commit: src/sys/dev
On 22/10/2018 21:13, Jaromir Dolecek wrote: > designed to primarily fix kern/52614, but might also help with kern/47041 > and kern/53183 For kern/53183, I've had my X60s running for the last 4 hours with a fresh install of i386 build from 201810230010Z. So far it's very promising, I've had parallel checkouts and update of src,pkgsrc,xsrc running without issue. I am also now able to switch wapbl on and off on the the root filesystem without the system seizing up whilst doing I/O. I will continue to test for another week and see it goes as well as test on the G3 iBook which I also experienced the issue on. Initial impression is promising, thank you so much for working on this. Sevan
