TCP SACK backport to -STABLE
dart at nersc.gov
Wed Aug 25 13:45:36 PDT 2004
In reply to Darcy Buskermolen <darcy at wavefire.com> :
> On August 25, 2004 06:44 am, Marko Zec wrote:
> > On Wednesday 25 August 2004 00:15, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > > You do know don't you, that if you continue to do these things, you will
> > > be punnished by
> > > getting a CVS commit bit..?
> > Well, I didn't write the code myself, just ported it from -CURRENT. Anyhow,
> > glad to see that people still care about the 4.x branch.
> > Re that commit bit, what kind of commiter would that be who only likes to
> > work on -STABLE? :)
> The kind that would be liked by those who like some of the features of
> -CURRENT, but policy won't allow them to put them into production...
Careful there.....one major reason I use FreeBSD is that, compared
with the other operating systems I can use, major breakages are rare.
I expect the policy that prevents you from deploying the most
featureful OS available is there to avoid the late-night pain
required to run the latest and greatest features in production.
It would be a shame if stability were lost in a rush for new
features. If smarter people than I feel that SACK should be
backported, great. However, I for one greatly appreciate the
commitments to stability and POLA that are so much a part of FreeBSD.
> Darcy Buskermolen
> Wavefire Technologies Corp.
> ph: 250.717.0200
> fx: 250.763.1759
> freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 224 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/attachments/20040825/11fb98a9/attachment.bin
More information about the freebsd-net