Re: [PATCH] Add CONFIG_VFAT_NO_CREATE_WITH_LONGNAMES option

Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04T12:41:35Z

On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 11:49:29PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
>
> > On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 10:42:52PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> The only reason I can see for not ultimately talking about things publicly
> >> is if this is one company making shady deals with another company in which
> >> case I do not see why the maintenance burden for those decision should
> >> fall on the linux community as a whole.
> >
> > Another reason is that past experience would indicate that anything we
> > say in public and and will be used against us.
>
> Which is a fine reason to be careful what you say, and to say
> reasonable things.

I am glad you agree.

> It is not a reason to submit a patch without
> justification.
>
> If the reason for submitting a patch is not sufficiently good to be
> held to then it appears insufficient to merge the patch.
>
> Why should the commit to a position at your urging that you aren't
> willing to commit to?

I am not sure that I correctly parsed these three sentences, but the
justification should be pretty clear to anyone who has been paying any
attention at all to recent industry news.

Thanx, Paul