From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: acmay@acmay.homeip.net Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:09:53 -0700 To: jpeters@mvista.com Cc: andrew may , John Tyner , linuxppc-commit@source.mvista.com, linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: ppc405 enet changes (fwd) Message-ID: <20010905090953.B621@sink.san.rr.com> References: <3B9557CA.D76C70E2@mvista.com> <20010904152608.B14548@ecam.san.rr.com> <3B9632EB.51904875@mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <3B9632EB.51904875@mvista.com>; from jpeters@mvista.com on Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 07:12:59AM -0700 Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 07:12:59AM -0700, jpeters@mvista.com wrote: .... > It is probably time for some more clean up in it. Remember that the > people who are responding to you have been working at this level > for a long time. They have the say (or at least some of it) because > they have shown they know what they are doing. It you get > defensive and make statements like you did below you will drive > people away. You have noticed that you are defending yourself. You should also notice that having to send a lot of emails to get a patch in would have tendency to prevent people from even bothering to send patches. The focus should be on the code, listing your work history is not a good defense of the code that is there. We can include a "Thank You for getting things working in bad conditions" with the patch if it makes it go in any smoother. If you read the lkml for any amount of time you will notice that resends, follow-ups, insults, and bruised egos are all part of the game of getting a patch in. ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/