>> Then there should be a discussion now that NetBSD has chosen to add the
>> same functionality so that the interfaces in queue.h are the same in
>> both OSes.
>
>I'd say:
>
>If you want shared functionality so much, then you should discuss your
>changes with the other parties that you might want to share it with
>(in this case, NetBSD and perhaps BSDI) before committing to changes
>which may be unacceptable to the other groups, etc.
>
>If you do something one way, and somebody does it another way, and you
>didn't discuss it with them, don't be upset; they're not the only ones
>at fault.
>
>Discussing it _before_ you try to 'require' that others use your
>interfaces means that all parties should be more comfortable, and, in
>most cases, that better interfaces will result.

I didn't require NetBSD to use this interface any more than I required
NetBSD to upgrade to the latest version of my driver.  Furthermore, the
interface name is the only difference between the two systems.  I'm
not attempting to say that the FreeBSD implementation is any better
or worse and I'm not trying to reconsile to fundamentaly different
ways of providing functionality.

As far as discussion, I'm surprised there wasn't any discussion about
this new interface on the NetBSD lists as most new interfaces are 
discussed.  Perhaps the same should have happened when FreeBSD added
the interface, but it was reviewed by core before being committed.

In the end, I don't care about assigning fault for this situation,
because it doesn't address the issue.  The question is whether
to fix this difference now and have better communication about
these types of changes in the future, or not.  Its that simple.

>cgd

--
Justin T. Gibbs
===========================================
  FreeBSD: Turning PCs into workstations
===========================================