On Mon, 24 Jan 2000, Mike Cheponis wrote:

> All I'm trying to say is that there is research that suggests that we can
> do better than we are currently doing, so perhaps we should try that?

Sure, there's a bit of rearch there. But somehow words from Marlow
come to mind: `it was a long time ago, in another country, and besides,
the wench is dead.'

To my mind, your insistence that we attempt to be scientific about this
by using the results of a study is entirely counterbalanced by the fact
that you have only one study to quote.  As I'm sure we all know, it's
not at all unusual for a study, especially when it's the first one in a
particular area, to come to wrong conclusions. The results don't really
have much validity until the study is repeated and is found to produce
similar results most times.

So if you're so keen on this, I'd suggest you do your own study and see
what you come up with. If it's with the NetBSD source code, so much
the better, since it will obviously be more relevant to us. However,
making a decision that involves hundreds and hundreds of man-hours of
work and quite a lot of disruption based on a paucity of evidence seems
to me insane.


cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson  <cjs@cynic.net>   917 532 4208   De gustibus, aut bene aut nihil.
The most widely ported operating system in the world: http://www.netbsd.org