Hi Pedro, I think you confuse blackmailing with something much simpler and pragmatic. One needs to asses how things work in your project for real before investing too much time.
Adrian was contemplating the fact that none writes code, so I had some code at the hand with with I can see how things work around here. You want it, good. You don't want it, its also good. You want to trash it… also good. Its all the same to me. This process is aimed to give me an idea , if your workflow works for me. > you discuss your idea and try to get some consensus in the > lists/IRC/conferences. I am not particularly interested in promoting ideas and gathering consensus. I am not a politician. I happen to believe that translating some utilities from the base to libraries is a very valuable addition to the project. Id rather spend time with my familty and walk around the city in nature with my GSD dog than embarking on some twisted political campaign. > We are particularly NOT interested in code where the original contributor > will walk > away as soon as he/she receives criticism or has plans that do not match ours. Undeerstandable. > > Libxo already went through this process. > >> Libxo already went through this process. It did, aint it ? And I seen what kind of “consensus” the xoification of base caused. Apparently, adopted for no better reason than “someone wrote code” . > If this is not your ideal workflow … fork your own BSD, a lot of intelligent > people do just that. Not the best thing one can do… but I guess to each his own. >> > > Wrong approach. You can’t really blackmail someone into taking your changes. > > Things work like this: > > - You discuss your idea and try to get some consensus in the > lists/IRC/conferences. > - You *write* a specific proof of concept and get it discussed. > - You finish your prototype. > - Your work gets rejected until you get something some committer is willing > to support. > - When there are no objections and a committer feels like it, your work gets > committed, > which doesn’t necessarily mean it will stay. > - You are expected to maintain it. > > Libxo already went through this process. > > We are particularly NOT interested in code where the original contributor > will walk > away as soon as he/she receives criticism or has plans that do not match ours. > If this is not your ideal workflow … fork your own BSD, a lot of intelligent > people do just that. > > Pedro. > >> >> Dan >> >> >> >>> On 19 Nov 2015, at 11:17, Pedro Giffuni <p...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hello; >>> >>>> Il giorno 19/nov/2015, alle ore 02:34, Dan Partelly >>>> <dan_parte...@rdsor.ro> ha scritto: >>>> >>>> Hey Pedro, >>>> >>>> some times ago you got some DDB patches from me in which I added >>>> relational ops support from it. The patch was a bit clobbered, >>>> but last I know you cleaned it up and put it somewhere on freebsd.org >>>> (prolly your page) up for review. >>>> >>> >>> It’s here: >>> https://people.freebsd.org/~pfg/patches/ddb.patch >>> >>> I haven’t tested it though. >>> >>>> Could you or Adrian review the patch set , and if it is OK potentially >>>> proceed with a commit ? Or if it is not ok for a commit , please advice on >>>> a follow up. >>>> >>> >>> I am having hardware issues so I won’t be able to do much in a while. >>> Perhaps you should review it and submit it as a PR. >>> >>> Pedro. >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
