Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 03:41:42 -0600 From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog@FreeBSD.org> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Future of RAIDFrame and Vinum (was: Future of RAIDFrame) Message-ID: <200401120341.42349.linimon@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <33570.1073898807@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <33570.1073898807@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I forgot to mention on rather important factor in this equation: Er, this is the *only* important factor. IMHO, it made most of the previous conversation be completely off-the-rails. > If nothing happens, vinum is going to break even more very soon. No ... if you do a commit that changes the code assumptions upon which vinum was built, vinum will break. vinum is not going to "magically" break by itself. This gets back to a problem with the FreeBSD development model: people who commit changes that break things in other parts of the system do not automatically get assigned the responsibility to fix them. Now, there's no way to impose something like that requirement on a cooperative anarchy, so I am not playing the "let's reorganize" card -- I think most of us would agree that "that dog won't hunt" as we say down around these parts. But, in the real world of software engineering, He Who Breaketh It, Must Fixeth It. Your mileage may vary. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200401120341.42349.linimon>