> I have to comment on this, it's too outrageous. Several times in the
> past, folks have written in and asked, if they wrote some particular
> piece of software, would it get committed. They said that it was a
> large undertaking, and that they wouldn't undertake it, unless there was
> general agreement beforehand about it.
There is a big difference between a general agreement that some feature
or
other is a "good thing" and a blank check of approval for code changes.
These seem to get confused all the time.
One example of this problem, in the opposite direction of the one you
mentioned, is the old, "If you think that's such a good idea, why don't you
code it and submit it?" This is equally unhelpful. If it's a bad idea, why
should anyone code it? If it's a code idea, why does it matter who codes it,
as long as it's coded well?
DS
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
