Date: 16 May 1996 22:59:43 -0500 From: "Richard Wackerbarth" <rkw@dataplex.net> To: "FreeBSD Current" <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, "FreeBSD Hackers" <hackers@FreeBSD.org>, "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org>, "Nate Williams" <nate@sri.MT.net> Subject: Re(2): Standard Shipping Containers - A Proposal for Distributing FreeBSD Message-ID: <n1379834885.1499@Richard Wackerbarth>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Not true. If you have direct access to freefall (developers only), you can use (4-sup) to get "up to the minute" copies of the CVS tree. If YOU can get "up to the minute" updates via sup, it is only because you fall in my category (1). My proposal does not affect a sup server that does not provide synchronous snapshots. > > The Proposal. > > Since all the reasonable distribution mechanisms are based upon server initiated snapshots > > Since your assumptions are invalid for one of the two most common > distribution method, the rest of the proposal is not completely valid. Since those who have the direct access are not really inhibited by this proposal, I suggest that you reconsider it in view of the other 99.99% of the folks for whom my assumptions apply. I hope there is somebody out there who cares about the difficulties of the "average joe" and doesn't simply brush off those problems because they are a member of the elite class who get to play by their own rules. -- ...computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1/2 tons. -- Popular Mechanics, March 1949
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?n1379834885.1499>