In message <87n1lu8pwh.fsf@snark.piermont.com>"Perry E. Metzger" writes


>Jonathan, please lay off Itojun. He's been doing a very good job. I
>don't think there is any good reason here to attack someone for doing
>lots of very hard work very well. I realize that he's not perfect, but
>then again, you may want to look in the mirror and ask if you are
>perfect, or if anyone else is perfect for that matter.

Perry,

Please dont cloud the issue.

What I see suggests that some IPv6 mods are being committed without
being tested *at all* on kernels without IPv6 beforehand.

while that may make for a great, or even a perfect job, of producing
an all-Ipv6 system, it is a *bad* job for people who need NetBSD 1.5
to run as an IPv4-only system.

Till now, I had assumed that "IPv6 integration" included making sure
that *non*-ipv6 systems also continued to work.  Itojun seems (to me)
to be saying that *he* thinks its not his job to do that.  But it is
very, very hard to tell.



I think it would be better all round if, instead of avoiding the
issue, the IPv6 developers would say upfront how much testing of those
changes is being done or planned on *non-IPv6 systems*
  a) before committing
  b) before the 1.5 branch is cut
  c) during the 1.5 release process,

(and by whom), instead of avoiding the issue.