[178941] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Harlan Stenn)
Sun Mar 15 17:21:49 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Harlan Stenn <stenn@ntp.org>
To: Rob Seastrom <rs@seastrom.com>
In-reply-to: <86wq2ie6la.fsf@valhalla.seastrom.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 21:20:25 +0000
Cc: "bcop-support@nanog.org" <bcop-support@nanog.org>,
"nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Rob Seastrom writes:
> The wiki/living document approach others have suggested seems like a
> poor one to me, for the same reason that I dislike the current trend
> of "there's no release tarball, major release, point release, or
> regression testing - just git clone the repository" in free software
> development.
And I like wikis for some things, here it might work (I haven't looked)
and I still do release tarballs with version numbers and some (we're
actively adding more) regression/unit/functional testing.
> Releng is hard and thankless
:)
> but adds enormous value and
> serves as a forcing function for some level of review, cursory though
> it may be.
I think so too.
Hey everybody, please support Network Time. Spread the word. OK, I said it.
--
Harlan Stenn <stenn@ntp.org>
http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member!
