Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote:
> "Bruce M. Simpson" writes:
> =20
>> * Do you mean to say that IMUNES/vimage has expanded beyond merely
>> wrapping the network stack and virtualizing that?
>>
>> If this is the case (it introduces some new virtualization technique
>> on par with the functionality of e.g. Xen) then I outright DISAGREE
>> with its introduction into the source tree on the grounds that it's
>> too experimental.
>> =20

>
> Well, it's only been discussed and developed and presented at every
> single BSD conference for the last, oh, three years or so, so yes, it's=


> obviously highly immature and experimental code.
> =20


My point above was referring to the ambiguity present in Julian's
message to the list, which seemed to suggest the remit of vimage had
increased beyond network virtualization.

How often a given topic is discussed is not analogous to in-depth
testing. Surely someone as experienced as yourself is aware of this. Are
you sure you read my message fully before responding to this thread?

> I'll have my virtual bikeshed blue, if you please.
> =20


I observe that your definition of the term bikeshed seems very subjective=
=2E

Nothing wrong with "Are you sure Y/N", to my mind, and if one further
re-reads this thread, one will see that there are issues around vimage
which have had to be teased out from others, and addressed, which Marko
has already responded to.

regards,
BMS



_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/lis...reebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"