Re: [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6-mm1 ] net: RFC 3828-compliant UDP-Lite support

[Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk>]

Quoting James Morris:
|  On Thu, 8 Jun 2006, David Miller wrote:
|  
|  > > Understood. Please, anyone, disregard or un-apply the previous
|  > > UDP-Lite patch.  A revised patch will be prepared and posted as soon
|  > > as testing permits.
|  > 
|  > Nobody is going to integrate your patch anywhere, don't worry.
|  > You make it clear that once you toss this piece of code over
|  > the wall, you'll disappear.
|  
|  Having dealt with more than enough code thrown over the wall in recent 
|  times, I agree.

I understand the points of both of you well enough. But how come this is interpreted 
as saying I'd "toss this piece of code over the wall"? I can understand getting tired 
of cowboy coding jobs, but there is a misunderstanding here.

Of course do and will I maintain that code and every issue related it. I have been
maintaining, improving, testing this code for 9 months. The protocol spec (RFC 3828)
was developed at University of Aberdeen, and there is continuing research into 
UDP-Lite here, i.e. it is not a `dead' project. That is why I held back regarding the 
IPv6 port: I can ensure that this (IPv4) code is up to standard and to date, but am 
lacking the required additional time to implement the same for IPv6. 
I am trying to contact people to help with the port, but for the moment I will take 
responsibility only for the IPv4 version.

And if there is someone `well-known and respected' who is interested in taking this code 
over, I would only be happy for him/her to do this. But I won't simply `disappear' :-)