From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55714) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WjHXv-0002Xx-P1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2014 20:23:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WjHXu-0007TI-RX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2014 20:23:15 -0400 Received: from speedy.comstyle.com ([2001:470:1d:8c::2]:38886 helo=mail.comstyle.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WjHXu-0007TD-NI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2014 20:23:14 -0400 Message-ID: <536EC2AB.3030701@comstyle.com> Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 20:22:03 -0400 From: Brad Smith MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <536B9900.2010108@comstyle.com> <536D5EA2.30307@comstyle.com> <536D6994.2090404@comstyle.com> <8761le6tfz.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <536DCAF4.2040507@comstyle.com> <536DD034.3060705@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <536DD034.3060705@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU build broken List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini , Markus Armbruster Cc: Peter Maydell , Riku Voipio , qemu-devel On 10/05/14 3:07 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 10/05/2014 08:45, Brad Smith ha scritto: >>> >>> Having your feature in-tree is a privilege, not a right. You earn it by >>> helping to maintain it. "it's not really maintained right now" means it >>> has not been earning its keep. You're encouraged to remedy that. >> >> Huh? "my feature"? I have nothing to do with this. What kind of crazy >> is this? How to misdirect and not take responsibility for breaking >> something. If there wasn't sloppy irresponsible development in the >> first place it wouldn't be an issue. > > Brad, > > all this is doing, is convincing people that bsd-user is not worth > keeping in the tree. It's a fact that in a million-line codebase not > all patches can be tested by all people. My posts have nothing to do with bsd-user. I don't give a shit about it. The real issue is the process and the fact that someone removed a constant from the configure script and didn't even grep the tree to see if it existed anywhere else. That is very sloppy. > Why don't you send a patch instead of whining? Constantly trying to deflect from the real issues. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.