From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934307AbXG2TYx (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:24:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932764AbXG2TYo (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:24:44 -0400 Received: from pasmtpa.tele.dk ([80.160.77.114]:57601 "EHLO pasmtpA.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1765537AbXG2TYo (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:24:44 -0400 Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:25:59 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Martin Steigerwald Cc: ck@vds.kolivas.org, Linus Torvalds , Jan Engelhardt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lkml@metanurb.dk Subject: Re: [ck] Re: Linus 2.6.23-rc1 Message-ID: <20070729192559.GA20961@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <200707291256.32769.Martin@lichtvoll.de> <20070729174239.GA20399@uranus.ravnborg.org> <200707292023.36555.Martin@lichtvoll.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200707292023.36555.Martin@lichtvoll.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 08:23:31PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Am Sonntag 29 Juli 2007 schrieb Sam Ravnborg: > > On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 12:56:28PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > Am Sonntag 29 Juli 2007 schrieb Sam Ravnborg: > > > > > I > > > > > actually also think that the communication between Ingo and Con > > > > > could have been better especially when Ingo decided to write CFS > > > > > while Con was still working hard on SD. > > > > > > > > You realize that Ingo posted his code for anyone to look at/comment > > > > at about 48 hours after he started to work on CFS? > > > > > > Yes. > > > > So whats wrong then? > > Ingo decides to do a better scheduler - to some extent inspired by > > Con's work. And after 48 hours he publish first version that _anyone_ > > can see and comment on. Whats wrong with that? > > > > Did you expect some lengthy discussion before the coding phase started > > or what? > > > > Just trying to understand what you are arguing about. > > If I tried to rewrite a kernel subsystem - should I ever happen to dig > that deep into kernel matters - while I actually know that someone > already spent countless hours on exactly rewriting the exact same > subsystem, I think I would have told that other developer about it as > soon as I started coding on it. The usual way to communicate such things on lkml are with patches as also happened in this case. It's not like Ingo had secretly developing a scheduler in parallel for weeks or months but. But I assume all the fuzz is about something else - it cannot be about a these 48 hours - I hope.. Enough on this - back to work. Sam