From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 25 19:45:17 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82AFD16A41F; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:45:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from markm@FreeBSD.org) Received: from storm.uk.FreeBSD.org (storm.uk.FreeBSD.org [194.242.157.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3DE543D45; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:45:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from markm@FreeBSD.org) Received: from storm.uk.FreeBSD.org (uucp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by storm.uk.FreeBSD.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j9PJjFRv028348; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:45:15 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from markm@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by storm.uk.FreeBSD.org (8.13.4/8.12.11/Submit) with UUCP id j9PJjFkr028347; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:45:15 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from markm@FreeBSD.org) Received: from grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grunt.grondar.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j9PJiFKx021173; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:44:15 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from markm@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <200510251944.j9PJiFKx021173@grunt.grondar.org> To: John Baldwin From: Mark Murray From: Mark Murray Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:44:15 +0100 Cc: Roman Kurakin , cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, obrien@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/cp if_cp.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:45:17 -0000 John Baldwin writes: >Also, anyone with half a brain that reads commit mail knows that rik works on >cp(4) and cx(4), so I think that your lack-of-MAINTAINERS claim is just a >bunch of hot air personally. The goal here is not to be able to point at >someone and say "look, he didn't follow the exact letter of sub-section 7 of >rule8 !!!!", the goal is to turn out a non-suck OS in an environment via a >rather diverse (geographic and otherwise) group of developers. This means >that as developers we all need to be more like the software we supposedly >work on: strict on what we "send" (how we work with other folks), and liberal >on what we "receive" (how we handle interactions with other folks). Rules are not there for people to nitpick. They are there to help enable us to >achieve the end goal, but you need to evaluation actions as far as how best >to achieve the end goal. Brilliantly said!! Mr Baldwin, take a bow. M -- Mark R V Murray What is the most interesting question you have asked? What, if any, was the answer?