David O'Brien wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 12:34:08PM -0500, Robert Watson wrote:
> > Hmm. The argument for A is, I think, is a lot stronger than for J, since
> > it comes without the performance impact, and you can actually generate
> > useful diagnostics. I would be fine with leaving A in the developer
> > snapshot.
>
> Lets back up and clarify RE's goals for the DP#1. Turning off all of our
> debugging options and appearing to make this benchmark ready were not
> part of what I [thought I] heard at the Kernel Summit at BSDcon.
I didn't hear that either, and it's starting to make me a little
nervous. It's bad enough that the first DP will be almost wholely unlike
what the 5.0-Release will actually look like, now it seems that its
value will be further reduced by making it very different from -Current
of the same time period. I see two major problems with that. First, it
does little good for us to release something to a wider audience if it's
not going to be what and how we're actually trying to test. The other
major problem is that I really don't think many users are going to stick
with the DP versions. When users complain about bugs in the DP's, they
are going to be pointed to -Current. Then they are going to have to
experience the learning curve anyway.
I think a better solution would be to ship the DP's with the same
defaults as -Current of the same vintage, and educate the users as to
how to remove some of the debugging features. As others have said, this
is supposed to be a DEVELOPER'S preview. Until we get closer to
something that looks like a release, leaving the bar set a little higher
benefits both us and our potential consumers.
Doug
--
"We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power.
And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory."
- George W. Bush, President of the United States
State of the Union, January 28, 2002
Do YOU Yahoo!?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
