Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 21:17:00 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth), Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Latest Current build failure Message-ID: <199609050317.VAA03865@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <5412.841891920@time.cdrom.com> References: <v02140b02ae53a4a2fce7@[208.2.87.4]> <5412.841891920@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> In case someone else should want to try this, I can only offer this > advice: Design and build a prototype, show it off to everyone, we'll > go from there. Case in point. SUP is a 'good' distribution tool. However, we all admit that it had flaws. Enter John Polstra. Following the *exact* procedure above, he implemented CVSup, tested it, and then presented it to Jordan and a few other developers. Jaws dropped. CVSup *worked* (mostly). More debug time, bugs fixed, time elapsed and now CVSup is the 'preferred' distribution mechanism for developers, not because John convinced everyone how bad SUP was (we all know it's problems), but how much *better* CVSup was. John Polstra for president, John Polstra is a minor-deity. :) Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199609050317.VAA03865>