Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] MM transition

[Josh Law <joshlaw48@gmail.com>]

On 22 April 2026 20:03:33 BST, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 08:25:24PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
>> Hello, since I'm not coming to LSF/BPF because of my age (aw)
>
>What is this nonsense?  You aren't coming to LSFMM because you haven't
>requested an invitation.  If you had requested an invitation, you would
>have been rejected (because we have limited seats and there are people
>who are far more qualified than you who did not get an invitation).

Sorry. Yeah, didn't realise till I googled it.


>You already have a reputation as a liar [1].  Don't compound it.  At this
>point I've tentatively assigned to you some other nasty character traits.
>
>[1]
>https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/cea99016-5407-4392-9b7d-2e6a994f550f@lucifer.local/

The "bot" thing has been disproven [1]

About the whole trust thing. I'm working hard to get that back, sorry
but no need to be harsh.

I'm working with Steven here to try and handle the social side, bare
with me here since I'm not perfect

[1]:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260402093410.040423b1@gandalf.local.home/

>> (And I'm more than aware this post is more mm focused, but I'm
>> representing lib :))
>
>No.  You're not.  You sent a presumptive patch adding yourself as lib
>reviewer, and that was also rejected.  You don't have what we're looking
>for in a maintainer, and you're starting from rather further behind than
>somebody with no record.

No, not in the maintainer way. As in like me being patriotic for the
directory 

Let's please please please not cause a argument here. We can agree to
disagree on things. 

(Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org because I said his name.)


Thanks!