Request to back out Luigis polled-net patch in -stable.

[Garance A Drosihn]

At 9:44 PM +0100 12/7/01, Marko Zec wrote:
>Mike Smith wrote:
>  > > I would also like to point to the parallel piece of code: Jun-Itohs
>>  > ALTQ for which he reliably has maintained a patch relative to the
>>  > 4.X branch and which despite various peoples requests have not
>  > > haphazardly been committed into -stable.
>  >
>>  Yes; this is an excellent example of how it can be done better.
>
>Sorry guys, but aren't you comparing apples with oranges?

They are comparing how two changes were made.  Not what the changes
actually *do*, but the path the changes took to get into -stable.
In that sense, they are not comparing apples to oranges.  They are
comparing the conveyor belts under the apples vs the conveyor belts
the oranges were allowed to use.

>Concerning the request for removal of the polling code, I personally
>as a BSD rookie cannot judge your arguments properly, but I must
>admit that the wording and intonation of pkh's note wasn't very
>pleasant...

Poul-Henning included one comment about "track records" which may
have been a bit harsh, but if you ignore that one sentence than
everything he said seemed pretty reasoned (ie, "calmly thought out",
as opposed to "emotional outburst"), and pretty reasonable.

I think PHK and Mike Smith have made a pretty good case, but I will
admit that I don't know all of the issues involved.  I suspect the
other side of this debate is that Luigi's change is meant for
high-load situations, and very very very few people are running a
5.0-current system in those kinds of high-load situations.  I can
see that being a good reason to put it in stable, but even with
this good reason, I think it might be better to back the change out
of stable until AFTER 4.5 is released.

This change did not go thru the "normal routine" for changes, and
as such I do think any developer has the right to make a case that
the change should be backed out.  I *like* what the change is trying
to do, and the methods it is using certainly sound interesting.  But
I don't think it would hurt to have it looked over a bit more before
committing it to -stable.

That's just my opinion, as I watch this debate from the sidelines.

-- 
Garance Alistair Drosehn            =   gad at eclipse.acs.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer           or  gad at freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    or  drosih at rpi.edu

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message