On 4/19/16 7:39 AM, dan_partelly wrote:
What should not happen is that this incremental step forward be blocked
by those unwilling to hash out the next steps.
-Alfred
While incremental steps forward are great, how do you avoid situations
like VNET, where a "good enough" enough implementation, usable in some
scenarios lingered for years in kernel, but to this day it suffers from
leaks and bugs. Once you go down the path of enabling it in this state,
chances are that it will stay that way for more than half a decade.
We happened to use VNET at our last company with great success. Had it
not existed we would have been much further away from our goals. Maybe
you picked a bad example? :)
Look, take a look at history and the Linux kernel threads story and its
impact on FreeBSD. If you'd like I can talk about it.
-Alfred
_______________________________________________
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"
