From owner-freebsd-ipfw Wed Jul 28 13:41:14 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from ns.mt.sri.com (ns.mt.sri.com [206.127.79.91]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D912C14C56; Wed, 28 Jul 1999 13:41:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nate@mt.sri.com) Received: from mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by ns.mt.sri.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA05371; Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:40:20 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate@rocky.mt.sri.com) Received: by mt.sri.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA03306; Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:40:19 -0600 Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:40:19 -0600 Message-Id: <199907282040.OAA03306@mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: "Brian F. Feldman" , Nate Williams , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: securelevel and ipfw zero In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.34 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > > *rant on* > > > Brian, FreeBSD isn't your private playground for playing around, this is > > > a group project, and you gotta follow the rules, or you don't get to > > > play with the rest of the folks.... > > > > The rules don't say "leave the code that you work with in a bigger mess than > > when you started." Cleaning up code is a fact of life, and it _NEEDS_ to be > > done to get work done, very often. You have to learn to deal with that. > > > > > *rant off* > > and so it should remain, changes that provide readability to > code should be committed, the only time documentation of code > is wrong is when it it is incorrect. The changes pointed out do *NOT* make the code more readable. They just move statements around for no reason, and change whitespace. > Increasing the size of the cvs repo is not a consideration when > worthwhile docs can be incorperated, especially when the person > who needs to maintain it requires changess for readability. Brian is *NOT* the maintainer, he is the author of a patch to it. Doesn't anyone care for keeping the source code consistant *AND* maintainable for multiple people, as well as maintaining a history of *CHANGES* for people to review in the future? Or is this Linux, where we don't give a rip and whatever the current patch does to the rest of the tree is fine, since the more code we have the better? Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message