Wow, look -- more useless chatter on the topic.

The bt stack we had was designed as "network code", and all sorts of
complex layer violations and device hand-offs were very complicated and
troublesome.

The code was not deleted because bluetooth is shit.  The code was
deleted *because it was shitty and unsuited to the purpose*

And then noone stepped up to write new code.  THAT IS THE WHOLE STORY.

People on misc often want some complicated conspiracy, and fails to
understand it is ALWAYS that "someone has to write the code and maintain
it", and if such a person doesn't exist then either (a) the code doesn't
exist, or (b) the code sucks and people complain about it until (c) we
delete it and then (d) people on misc try to invent fake history.

Since no such person existed, (a) led to (c) and here we are at (d).

I wish everyone would stop making uneducated guesses and trying to
rewrite history that isn't STUDIED and understand.  In particular what
bothers me is the LACK OF STUDY, but this is misc, STUDYING stuff is
clearly too hard, and making uneducated guesses is the norm.

John Brahy <j...@brahy.com> wrote:

> Right, without reading the code and only reading this commit message it's all 
> conjecture. 
> I was just hoping to hear something more if someone was inclined to share.
>  inclined. The commit message seems like some sort of inside joke. 
> 
> Log message:
> "It's not the years, honey; it's the mileage."
> 
> bluetooth support doesn't work and isn't going anywhere. the current
> design is a dead end, and should not be the basis for any future support.
> general consensus says to whack it so as to not mislead the unwary.
> 
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 10:06 AM Theo de Raadt <dera...@openbsd.org> wrote:
> 
>  Bryan Wright <bryanwesleywri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>  > Are there technical/philosophical problems that make all versions of
>  > Bluetooth incompatible with the project, or is it a just matter of
>  > removing what is not being maintained?
> 
>  I'm sure a bunch of you can come up with theories about what actually
>  transpired, without reading any of the code that used to be here, or
>  the commit messages.
> 
>  Basically, feel free to keep making up stuff.
> 

Reply via email to