From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751224AbXCJWMA (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Mar 2007 17:12:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751240AbXCJWMA (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Mar 2007 17:12:00 -0500 Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]:1114 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751224AbXCJWL7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Mar 2007 17:11:59 -0500 Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 23:11:50 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: michael chang Cc: Stephen Clark , ck list , linux kernel mailing list Subject: Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.28 for 2.6.20 Message-ID: <20070310221150.GA6274@1wt.eu> References: <200703101845.59497.kernel@kolivas.org> <45F2F45F.6000403@seclark.us> <20070310191118.GL943@1wt.eu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 04:56:57PM -0500, michael chang wrote: > On 3/10/07, Willy Tarreau wrote: > >BTW, Con, I think that you should base your work on 2.6.20.[23] and not > >2.6.20 next time, due to this conflict. It will get wider adoption. ^^^^^^^^^^ > Maybe I'm naive, but I find this hard to understand -- 2.6.20.2 didn't > exist when Con published his patch. (Con published it ~12 hours before > the release of 2.6.20.2, from what I can tell.) How can he base his > work on something that didn't yet exist? (And it applied cleanly to > 2.6.20.1, the latest when he published it.) You see the words I have underlined ? "next time". I know for sure he published it before 2.6.20.2, but now that it is out, I suggested that Con rebases his work on this version for new releases. Regards, Willy