Charles Hannum said:
> If someone presents a reasonable, coherent plan that will not break
> existing devices, I will certainly look at it.  However, last time
> this was mentioned to me, Chris's code was not publically available,
> and he refused to give me a copy or explain how he had resolved a
> particular problem, so I don't even know what it does.

Actually, your statement about my code is so wrong that i'm going to
reply to it again.

(1) my code is, was, and has been publically available since before or
around the time that i talked with you about it the first time.  (I
can't say for 100% sure that it was before, but think about it: i had
to make it work just a little bit before I could even think to discuss
it, and i shipped the code to support AlphaStations as soon as i had
written it.)  It's undergone many revisions since then, even, and
needs to go through several more.

(2) I don't recall what problem you were asking about; you might ask
again.  (you certainly didn't ask about a specific problem the last
time we talked about the code.)  It could very well be a problem that
i punted on; as i've said all along, it is not currently a "finished
work," and i'm still trying to figure out how i think some things
should work.

(3) each and every release of the code (as part of NetBSD/Alpha) has
been announced on a public NetBSD mailing list.

(4) the last time you asked about it, i informed you, several times,
that it _was_ publically available.  however, i would _not_ tell you
where it was, for two reasons:

	(a) you're a member of NetBSD's 'core group'.  If you're
	    that unfamiliar with the state of a certain port of NetBSD
	    which is partially in the source tree, or if you're
	    sufficiently dense not to grasp that "some ISA changes
	    that I've developed for NetBSD/Alpha" may be in the 
	    NetBSD/Alpha kernel sources, then it's not my
	    responsibility to try to catch you up/clue you in.

	(b) previously, when i'd presented what i specifically stated
	    was a "rough" notion of some of the changes that should
	    be made, you spent quite a bit of time nit-picking
	    unpolished details.  I appreciate constructive criticism,
	    but I don't (didn't) have time or energy at this point (or
	    the time i presented some of the things i was working on)
	    to deal with one of your somewhat-famous nitpickings.



In other words, if you are:
	(1) not going to bother to think for a few seconds about what
	    you're asking about,

	(2) not going to pay adequate attention to what's going on
	    in the project to figure out what you need/want to know, or

	(3) not going to respect the fact that the code that i do to
	    improve ISA/EISA/PCI support is (was) done on my own time
	    and is (and was) a very rough cut of what the final
	    version should be,

then i'm sure as hell not going to _help_ you waste my time.

If you were a clueless 'random,' then i'd go out of my way to help
you and wouldn't think twice about it.  I spend a lot of my time
helping users and developers (of various abilities) to the best of my
ability.  However, you're a NetBSD 'core' group member, who'd like
people to think of him as the "mature, system architect type."  If
you want people to think of you that way, and want people to work
constructively with you, then you'd damned well better start acting
like it.


To the innocent bystanders:

Sorry about the flame... but this one's been building for a fair
number of months now, and i am not -- was not -- going to let
Charles's wrong and intentionally misleading statements go unanswered.




chris