Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 20:21:42 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net> To: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net>, Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, FreeBSD-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: The -stable problem: my view Message-ID: <199606080221.UAA02108@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.93.960608104358.14546A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> References: <199606072207.QAA00896@rocky.sri.MT.net> <Pine.SV4.3.93.960608104358.14546A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Terry proposes a set of tools to help enforce the policy of always having > a buildable tree. Would this make the commit process too cumbersome? Because these tools are unattainable. Saying 'it would be nice if we could guarantee that the tree was always buildable' is like saying 'it would be nice if everyone liked everyone'. It's a wonderful goal, but it's unattainable given the current resources. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606080221.UAA02108>