Hi, On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian_at_freebsd.org> wrote: > On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl <sgk_at_troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: >>> Offer a bounty for getting it fixed? >>> >> >> steve == ENOMONEY && jeffr == ENOTIME >> >> And, 4BSD works. > > I meant it as a more general observation. > > If something doesn't work as needed, consider either diving in to fix > it, or offering a bounty to someone to do so. > What would be the point to even start looking at an issue? You guys (by "you", I mean "official" committers on public list) don't care about people providing patches, might it be for trivial, obvious, fixes. I'm not even talking about complex patches ... When you eventually ends up providing a patch, you ends up being slammed a door at by maintainers asserting their code is perfect, until logic and user complaints prove them wrong. That said, this comment is off-topic, but I will certainly re-state this next month when I'll be ping'ing trivial patches. - Arnaud > It sounds like these scheduler issues (IO and threads) are well-known > and reasonably well-understood. > All that's lacking is the last bit of the puzzle - the actual > developer to develop it. :) > > > Adrian >Received on Thu Jul 07 2011 - 02:08:02 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:15 UTC