On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:46:49 +1030 "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog_at_freebsd.org> wrote: > Hmm. I can't see why they have to disappear from the source tree, and > I don't see why Scott or I should have to look the other way. I don't > know about RAIDFrame, but Vinum still works for the most part: [...] > > In the p4 tree, we can easier add new talent to our developer force > > and I am pretty sure that some sort of merry band of developers > > would form around both RF and vinum there. > > OK, I'm not a fan of p4, but I suspect that's not the issue. This > sounds like a way of suggesting "Let's do VinumNG and RFNG and get a > whole lot of people involved". I couldn't agree more. [...] > > I'd say lets kick them both into perforce and let whoever wants > > their hands have a go at them. > > For some definition of perforce, I'm all for it. Note that there's > also an OS-independent mailing list (see > http://www.auug.org.au/mailman/listinfo/vinum-devel for joining > instructions). I'm a little bit confused. I've read Pouls mail as an suggestion to remove vinum from -current and let people modify it in the perforce repository. If I got this wrong, please tell me and everything is fine, but if I got it right, do you (Greg) agree to remove it from -current? Bye, Alexander. -- I will be available to get hired in April 2004. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander _at_ Leidinger.net GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7Received on Sun Jan 11 2004 - 02:08:46 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:37 UTC