On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:10:57AM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Wed, 4 Mar 2015 00:13:01 +0100
> From:Joerg Sonnenberger
> Message-ID: <20150303231301.gb13...@britannica.bec.de>
>
> | It comes with a maintainance price. Add something better a version later
> |
Date:Wed, 4 Mar 2015 00:13:01 +0100
From:Joerg Sonnenberger
Message-ID: <20150303231301.gb13...@britannica.bec.de>
| It comes with a maintainance price. Add something better a version later
| and it is significantly harder to get rid of the once shiny toy.
Taken
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 09:13:31PM +0100, Marc Balmer wrote:
> Am 03.03.15 um 17:49 schrieb Joerg Sonnenberger:
> > On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 03:58:56PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> >> For actionable items:
> >>
> >> pwait:
> >>Should I remove pwait or leave it? Are there any features you want
Am 03.03.15 um 17:49 schrieb Joerg Sonnenberger:
> On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 03:58:56PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> For actionable items:
>>
>> pwait:
>>Should I remove pwait or leave it? Are there any features you want added?
>
> Bring it up on tech-userlevel.
>
>> In general:
>>Shoul
Am 03.03.15 um 16:58 schrieb Christos Zoulas:
> For actionable items:
>
> pwait:
>Should I remove pwait or leave it? Are there any features you want added?
no.
>
> In general:
>Should we have more concrete commit rules, or do we prefer that current
>status quo which is to leave thing
Am 03.03.15 um 21:22 schrieb Greg Troxel:
>
> Marc Balmer writes:
>
>> Am 03.03.15 um 14:35 schrieb Greg Troxel:
>>>
>>> chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) writes:
>>>
If we want to make every single change to go through
tech-userlevel, we should institute a rule to do so. To my
Am 03.03.15 um 22:03 schrieb Greg Troxel:
>
> Marc Balmer writes:
>
>> I think you contradict yourself, when you say a) new programs in
>> base are pretty rare, and b) we have too much "commit first,
>> argue about appropriate later".
>
> Both are true; some/most "commit first discuss later" is
Am 03.03.15 um 21:32 schrieb Greg Troxel:
>
> Marc Balmer writes:
>
>>> I meant that adding to base was discuss-worthy because there's
>>> a "bloat or necessary" question, not because of risk of
>>> breakage.
>>
>> Sure. So how much "bloat" is pwait? Is it a huge piece of
>> software or a sma
Marc Balmer writes:
> I think you contradict yourself, when you say a) new programs in base
> are pretty rare, and b) we have too much "commit first, argue about
> appropriate later".
Both are true; some/most "commit first discuss later" isn't about new
programs.
> While in some cases it makes
Marc Balmer writes:
>> I meant that adding to base was discuss-worthy because there's a
>> "bloat or necessary" question, not because of risk of breakage.
>
> Sure. So how much "bloat" is pwait? Is it a huge piece of software
> or a small utility? I think that matters a bit.
Posting a note t
Marc Balmer writes:
> Am 03.03.15 um 14:35 schrieb Greg Troxel:
>>
>> chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) writes:
>>
>>> If we want to make every single change to go through
>>> tech-userlevel, we should institute a rule to do so. To my
>>> knowledge we don't have yet such a rule. We already
Am 03.03.15 um 14:35 schrieb Greg Troxel:
>
> chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) writes:
>
>> If we want to make every single change to go through
>> tech-userlevel, we should institute a rule to do so. To my
>> knowledge we don't have yet such a rule. We already have the rest
>> of the p* pro
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 03:58:56PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> For actionable items:
>
> pwait:
>Should I remove pwait or leave it? Are there any features you want added?
Bring it up on tech-userlevel.
> In general:
>Should we have more concrete commit rules, or do we prefer that cur
For actionable items:
pwait:
Should I remove pwait or leave it? Are there any features you want added?
In general:
Should we have more concrete commit rules, or do we prefer that current
status quo which is to leave things to people's judgement and occasionally
backout things when peo
On Mar 3, 8:35am, g...@ir.bbn.com (Greg Troxel) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/usr.bin/pwait
| We do sort of have a rule, which is that significant changes need
| discussion. I would say adding programs to base always counts. Other
| than that, it's trickier, but if ther
chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) writes:
> If we want to make every single change to go through tech-userlevel,
> we should institute a rule to do so. To my knowledge we don't have yet
> such a rule. We already have the rest of the p* programs which originated
> in Solaris, we were missing t
In article <20150303071552.gc27...@britannica.bec.de>,
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>
>You are missing the most important part of my mail: why did this not go
>to tech-userlevel first?
If we want to make every single change to go through tech-userlevel,
we should institute a rule to do so. To my kn
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 02:35:49AM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <20150303003710.ga20...@britannica.bec.de>,
> Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 04:43:39PM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> >> Module Name: src
> >> Committed By: christos
> >> Date:
In article <20150303003710.ga20...@britannica.bec.de>,
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 04:43:39PM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> Module Name: src
>> Committed By:christos
>> Date:Mon Mar 2 21:43:39 UTC 2015
>>
>> Added Files:
>> src/usr.bin/pwai
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 04:43:39PM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: christos
> Date: Mon Mar 2 21:43:39 UTC 2015
>
> Added Files:
> src/usr.bin/pwait: Makefile pwait.1 pwait.c
>
> Log Message:
> Add pwait, from FreeBSD
Please don't just import prog
20 matches
Mail list logo
