cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_sig.c

[John Baldwin]

On Wednesday 03 November 2004 05:02 pm, Wilko Bulte wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 02:47:33PM -0700, Scott Long wrote..
>
> > David O'Brien wrote:
> > >On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 02:29:38PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > >>On Friday 29 October 2004 07:48 pm, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > >>>I made 3-4 requestss, each one had an ACK that said, "sorry, right
> > >>>on it!"
> > >>>
> > >>>It's just not acceptable.
> > >>
> > >>Are you volunteering to be an re@ secretary ala wilko@?
> > >
> > >Why does every group now need a secretary?  Maybe we just need more
> > >members on RE@ that are very active.
> >
> > With all due respect, I'd like the members of the release engineering
> > team to decide what is best for them, and have less armchair
> > quarterbacking of what others think we need.
>
> I would just like to say this: don't overengineer what aint broken. 
> Sjeez.. it is hardly a Supreme Court worthy case that re@ forgot to update
> some stupid web page is it?
>
> Wouldn't a normal, if need be public, reply to the automated reminder
> email have been sufficient to get that fixed?

My suggestions about a secretary were trying to do two things: 1) ask if 
Alfred wanted to help be a solution to the problem (though that is not 
required), and 2) acknowledge that re@ does have a problem in that requests 
really do get dropped on the floor.  During hectic release times re@ gets 
almost as much mail as current@, and that's a lot of e-mail for a handful of 
folks to handle.  The role of a secretary would be similar to that of 
yourself in core@ to help keep items from slipping through the cracks, etc.  
Maybe this is something that I can try to work on for the next release cycle 
myself.

-- 
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve"  =  http://www.FreeBSD.org