From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chetan Loke Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010... Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:12:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <976203.51076.qm@web111913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <594039.74663.qm@web111905.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <594039.74663.qm@web111905.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Vladislav Bolkhovitin , James Bottomley Cc: scst-devel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Ok, pls ignore my first question: I was trying to access https://lwn.net/Articles/399148/ But I just read: http://lwn.net/Articles/400589/ Chetan --- On Wed, 8/18/10, Chetan Loke wrote: > From: Chetan Loke > Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010... > To: "Vladislav Bolkhovitin" , "James Bottomley" > Cc: "scst-devel" , linux-kernel@vge= r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org > Date: Wednesday, August 18, 2010, 2:58 PM > Hello James and others, >=20 > --- On Tue, 8/17/10, James Bottomley > wrote: >=20 > > From: James Bottomley > > Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re:=A0 linuxcon 2010... > > To: "Vladislav Bolkhovitin" > > Cc: "scst-devel" , > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, > linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org > > Date: Tuesday, August 17, 2010, 8:30 PM > > On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 20:20 +0400, > > Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote: > > > Hello James, > > >=20 > > > Could you comment rumors that decision about > future > > Linux SCSI target=20 > > > subsystem is done as well as other related > rumors: > >=20 > > If this is related to LSF, the notes on the I/O track > are > > here: > >=20 > > http://lwn.net/Articles/400491/ >=20 >=20 > During the open panel, my question was really specific -=20 >=20 > Q) What is the future of a SCSI-target subsystem in linux. > Which=20 > =A0=A0=A0target engine/subsystem can we expect? >=20 > Your answer) There is place for only 1 target-subsystem in > the Linux scsi stack and in the LSF summit the decision was > taken to merge LIO. Has that > decision changed since the summit? >=20 > As a scst-user what I would like to understand is, what was > that decision based on? Because the LSF summit was 'small by > invitation' only summit. The notes don't give us an insight > on the selection criteria/merits etc. >=20 >=20 > >=20 > > > 3. I have heard you said "Vlad wasn't comfortable > in > > handing up the=20 > > > control to the maintainers ... (this is how > kernel.org > > works)." I have=20 > > > no idea what you meant. I have never been asked > about > > anything like=20 > > > that, so I couldn't say anyhow that I'm not > > comfortable with anything.=20 > > > Could you clarify that? > > >=20 >=20 > 3) above is something that I emailed Vlad and the scst > community based on our offline conversation after the open > panel. If SCST really has licensing issues then I will > personally stop using SCST. Since Vlad hasn't > expressed any concerns on the above and neither have you > commented on it, is it safe to assume that the licensing > requirement is a non-issue? >=20 >=20 > Chetan Loke >=20 >=20 >=20 > =A0 =A0 =A0=20 >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= --------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by=20 >=20 > Make an app they can't live without > Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge > http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev=20 > _______________________________________________ > Scst-devel mailing list > Scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scst-devel >=20 =20