mechanisms (fwd) In-Reply-To: <p05101402b8a1ffde0552@[128.113.24.47]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 6:55 PM -0800 2/26/02, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > (1) The timeout begins when contention occurs, of the lock has been > >> declared. This means that if you seriously intend to do some work, > >> you can say "I'm going to do the work", but you don't risk losing the > >> lock until someone comes to you and says "Hey did you ever...". > > > >Locks shouldn't be unilateral and they shouldn't last more that the > >amount of time that it takes to import a change and get it stable. > >i.e. maybe a week or so at most. Someone used KSE-II as an example.. > >They said I had a 2 month lock (??) I don't know where they got that > >idea from.. I had a vague concensus that maybe things may be broken > >for a DAY OR TWO. while the commit was happenning. I the end it was > >about right. > > That would be me... > > I meant "lock" in the sense of expecting no one to make any major > changes in the same area of code. I seem to remember you asking for > such a "lock" (to use the term loosely) in July, and the KSE work > going in around August or so. My memory is admittedly vague. My > point was you explicitly asked for permission to go ahead with that > work, even though (at the time) we were shooting for a release date > in November. > > I don't mean the period of time that -current was actually unstable, > but the amount of time that other developers were asked to stay away > from a major section of code. I never asked for that.. > > -- > Garance Alistair Drosehn = [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
