From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262602AbUBZMRn (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Feb 2004 07:17:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262674AbUBZMRn (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Feb 2004 07:17:43 -0500 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:52702 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262602AbUBZMRk (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Feb 2004 07:17:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:17:27 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: Grigor Gatchev Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: A Layered Kernel: Proposal Message-ID: <20040226121727.GI7580@suse.de> References: <403D2030.8080606@matchmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 26 2004, Grigor Gatchev wrote: > I don't see the need for starting a project. > > First, if unsuccssful, no reason to start it. And if successful, it will > fork the kernel development, with all negative implications following. > I see no sense in doing what eventually will damage the kernel > development, instead of improving it. > > Second, the development of the kernel is already going this way, > regardless of our discussion. This is its logic. You can see no use of the > discussion, but you cannot see no use in following the kernel development > logic. > > What I offer is merely to see where the road that we tread now goes, and > can't we avoid some of the sideswings and the muddy parts. I love people saying 'we' even though they never contributed a single line of code to the project! Thanks a lot for your offer, I think I'll have to turn it down and get my insights elsewhere. There are plenty other places to troll. -- Jens Axboe