From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 26 18:29:57 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E01106566C; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:29:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 65-241-43-5.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B63B1A62A4; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:29:39 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4DB70F13.6060002@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:29:39 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110319 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexander Best References: <4DB70949.6090104@FreeBSD.org> <20110426182017.GA92471@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20110426182017.GA92471@freebsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org, Alexander Motin Subject: Re: Why not just name the cam-ata devices the same as the old names? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:29:57 -0000 On 04/26/2011 11:20, Alexander Best wrote: > personally i think maintaining backwards compatibility to adX is unnecessary. > the adaY names will appear in 9.0. anybody upgrading to a major new release > should expect to adjust certain config files and it's not really a big deal. The problem is that this is not a realistic point of view. When there are very good reasons to make changes like this we do it, but there has to be a *really* good reason. Something like this which is going to cause systems to fail when users reboot them better have an overwhelmingly good reason. And yes, I get that from a developer perspective we expect users to read documentation, they should know what they are doing before they do it, blah blah blah. Like I said, this is NOT a reasonable perspective, and screwing the users over in this way is going to do nothing but damage FreeBSD's reputation. Need I remind everyone on this list of the problems that have resulted from removing support for "dangerously dedicated" disks? Now imagine that 100 times over. So, my question stands. Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/