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=20
message to the list, which seemed to suggest the remit of vimage had=20
increased beyond network virtualization.

How often a given topic is discussed is not analogous to in-depth=20
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=20
re-reads this thread, one will see that there are issues around vimage=20
which have had to be teased out from others, and addressed, which Marko=20
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"