>>>>> "Warner" == Warner Losh <email@example.com> writes:
Warner> Mabye we could setup a CVS tree for our stuff and use SUP to
Warner> distribute it (or rcvs for committers) like FreeBSD and NetBSD
Warner> do. It works out really well there. I know that it would be
Warner> easier for me to just do a cvs commit than to package together
Warner> patches for files. CVS also has facilities for importing
Warner> "vendor" software packages and retaining local modifications
Warner> to those source bases.
I agree 100% to this model, but ...
Warner> Does anybody have enough disk and bandwidth and local control
Warner> of a system that they can put it on the net for this purpose?
Warner> I have disk and control, but only a 28.8K pipe that
Warner> multiplexes with news.
Fnet got all of this and Luc is the root there :)
Warner> Acutally, before we look for systems, maybe it would be best
Warner> to make sure that a consensus can be reached as to the
Warner> desirability of this working model. It would make no sense,
Warner> for example, if I'm the only one that thinks it is a good
Well I understood that our main kernel hacker around is not very
please with that due to network topology.