Status reports - why not regularly?

[Robert Watson]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Rahul Siddharthan wrote:

> Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > You can't expect them to take the initiative in submitting information
> > for the status reports.  Experience shows that they will be
> > enthusiastic about your undertaking for about three minutes and then
> > forget about it.
> > 
> > You can however expect them to answer questions about their work if
> > you can't figure things out on your own.
> 
> And having obtained the answers, may I suggest a site to post them at: 
> kerneltrap.org. 
> 
> This, together with lwn.net, is one of the most informative sites about
> fresh developments in the linux kernel; but kerneltrap.org also covers
> the BSDs.  So no need to reinvent the wheel; if the FreeBSD
> contributions to kerneltrap can be increased just a bit, it would be a
> very useful archive (in fact it already is). 

I've been very impressed/pleased with kerneltrap's coverage of FreeBSD.
We ought to do a better job of submitting stuff to them -- it looked like
a lot of the articles were the result of watching hackers, so one thing we
could do is encourage developers to send occasional "here's what's going
on with <foo>" to hackers/current at .  For example, I'd love to see an NDIS
summary post to both lists explaining where things stand so it gets picked
up as an article.

Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert at fledge.watson.org      Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research