Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 18:04:25 +1100 From: Tim Robbins <tjr@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin Makefile src/usr.bin/doscmd AsyncIO.c AsyncIO.h Makefile Makefile.dos PROBLEMS ParseBuffer.c README README.booting_dos bios.c callback.c callback.h cmos.c com.h config.c Message-ID: <20040325070425.GA23926@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> In-Reply-To: <200403241750.46400.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0403241434020.63489-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <200403241750.46400.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 05:50:46PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday 24 March 2004 05:35 pm, Julian Elischer wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Doug Barton wrote: > > > On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > I think most people heard "tjr assented to waiting" as the end of the > > > > discussion. > > > > > > > > remember emails can get re-orderred.. > > > > > > This is where a good threaded mail reader helps. :) Seriously though, > > > is there a strong, well-reasoned objection to the action by des, or can > > > we let this one go? As I said, my opinion is biased, but I don't see any > > > harm here on the tech side, nor do I see any bad faith on des' part. > > > > I don't think that, now that it's done, we should bring it back, but I > > do think that he got a different impression about the conversation that > > I got. > > Yes. I honestly don't care enough about doscmd(8) to want any changes from > the current situation, but my reading of the thread was that the consensus > was, if anything, to wait until 6.0. Upon re-reading the thread, I do see > that while DES did say he would provide patches to do what he did, he never > sent a mail saying 'Ok, here are the patches I'm going to commit on foo day' > whereas Tim did sent out a RFC before doing actual action. Given the amount > of pushback that Tim's request received, it seems to me it would have been > good form to have at least posted something to the effect of 'Ok, I've got > the patches do this now and am going to do so.' I mainly agreed to wait because I was sick of arguing. I still firmly believe that doscmd has no place in the base system of -current in 2004. Tim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040325070425.GA23926>