Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 09:33:09 +1030 From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] IPX and NWFS to be killed in -current. Message-ID: <20041206230309.GN92212@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <85967.1102352614@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041206165120.74271A-100000@fledge.watson.org> <85967.1102352614@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--HKLejDDV6gCqJAZ/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Monday, 6 December 2004 at 18:03:34 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041206165120.74271A-100000@fledge.watson.org>, Robe > rt Watson writes: > >>> We are aiming 6.X at production readiness around start of 2006. >>> >>> By that time IPX and NWFS are not really interesting and nobody seems to >>> be interested in doing the SMPng work on them. >>> >> I'm not necessarily opposed to removing IPX/SPX on the basis that it >> is hardly a mainstream protocol component anymore, but I think it's >> probably not accurate to say that no one is interested in doing the >> locking work for the IPX parts (since I'm working on it :-). > > That's cool, but there are so many other things I'd rather want to see > you spend your time on. Why don't you leave that kind of decision to the people who run the project? Your intentions appear to be at variance with those of the two members of core who have responded. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers. --HKLejDDV6gCqJAZ/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBtOUtIubykFB6QiMRApmgAKCQejWRQFu8jfxQkFO55YXDokO+PACgjPxn d5zfXvvCWVoOcLfSmV6av28= =sNlr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HKLejDDV6gCqJAZ/--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041206230309.GN92212>