On Sun, 2006-May-21 18:27:31 -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >> my intention to be offensive, merely to draw attention to problems we >> have with product management. These problems remain.
I suspect that the e-mail grog is apologising for should have been on a private mailing list rather than a public one. There have been a couple of cases recently where committers have attacked each other in public lists - this does not do anything to enhance an outsider's view of the Project. >The pcvt removal has been long planned. As a non-committer, the first I was aware of it was phk's mail last Wednesday (sent 3 hours before pcvt was axed). IMHO, this proposal should have been raised on -arch (and maybe -announce) with a period allowed for someone to come forward and take over (and fix) pcvt before it was axed. The ports subsystem seems to have a formal process where unloved and broken ports are explicitly flagged for deletion with a (normally) 3 month timeout for someone to step forward. Maybe something like this is needed in the base system as well. >pcvt illustrates a problem that we've had in the project where we have >too many identical ways of doing the same thing. Sometimes this >diversity is good, other times it gets in the way of project making >progres. To properly manage the project, we have to make sure that >there's a balance between these two extremes. I totally agree. My concern is the (apparent) lack of a formal process. -- Peter Jeremy
pgp2TylSiijBy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
