Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[AJ Lewis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3637 bytes --]

The list is now open.  I've talked to our admin and he's opening it up.
Send me e-mail if it doesn't work, 'cause something else is broken.

All it would have taken was a request and a good reason for doing so, but
I guess this is one way to do it.  Just don't complain about spam.  :)

Regards,
AJ Lewis

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:29:27PM -0500, AJ Lewis wrote:
> It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature
> manner.  Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something.  I won't
> bother to talk to them about it, I'll just flame them and try to undermine
> their work." is not acceptable.  It would have been nice if you'd actually
> tried to work this out instead of handling it this way.
> 
> Regards,
> AJ Lewis
> 
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 07:51:52PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > I would like to announce the creation of the openlvm mailing list for
> > discussion about maintenance and further development of the Linux
> > Logical Volume Manager (LVM).
> > 
> > The new mailing list is named linux-openlvm and hosted at
> > nl.linux.org, you can subscribe to the list by posting to
> > majordomo@nl.linux.org and postings should go to
> > linux-openlvm@nl.linux.org. The list is unmoderated and open to
> > postings from individuals who are not subscribed to the list as it is
> > good practice for all open development lists.
> > 
> > We have found it necessary to create the new list as the current LVM
> > development proces is closed and does not take input from the
> > community. We have experienced numerous incidents of postings to the
> > old mailing list with patches, on topic questions and comments about
> > the LVM code that have been rejected by the list moderator. We find
> > this completely unacceptable just as it is hindering development that
> > a development mailing list is being so mismoderated.
> > 
> > Please welcome the new list and join in on the development and
> > discussions.
> > 
> > Sincerly,
> > Jens Axboe
> > Arjan van de Ven
> > Martin Petersen
> > Rik van Riel
> > Jes Sorensen
> > -
> > Linux-openlvm: open list for LVM on Linux
> > Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-openlvm/
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> AJ Lewis
> Sistina Software Inc.                  Voice:  612-379-3951
> 1313 5th St SE, Suite 111              Fax:    612-379-3952
> Minneapolis, MN 55414                  E-Mail: lewis@sistina.com
> http://www.sistina.com
> 
> Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B  52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
> Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
>  (Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)
> 
> -----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
> Error: Keyboard not attached. Press F1 to continue.
> -----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------



-- 
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc.                  Voice:  612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111              Fax:    612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414                  E-Mail: lewis@sistina.com
http://www.sistina.com

Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B  52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
 (Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)

-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
Your mouse has moved. Windows NT must be restarted for the change to take
effect. Reboot now? [ OK ]
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Andreas Dilger]

AJ Lewis writes:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:02:50PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Well their approach to patches that fix bugs is to reject emails. They've
> > done that to stuff I've reported any many others. So there is a problem.
> > And it's kind of hard to discuss a problem when you are being moderated
> > out of existance.

Not to be negative, but isn't Alan the pot calling the kettle black?  You
use ORBS to block email as well, with no hope of reprieve.  AFAIK, the
linux-lvm list has a moderator which _should_ forward legitimate emails
on to the list.  Maybe they are piling up somewhere, unread?

> Hmm...i guess there is a communication issue here.  It sounds like the
> message that our ML server was sending was misleading.  We were not
> rejecting mail because of content.  The ML server was rejecting it because
> the address was not subscribed.  Our idea was that we don't want spam. 
> If it's completely unmoderated, then we will get a *lot* of spam.

I don't think that the subscription is necessarily the only issue.  I'm
subscribed to all of the LVM mailing lists, and still a lot of what I
submit (legitimate bug fixes, and not just features/code cleanup) does
not get added to CVS.  Yes, the no-possible-harm patches like man pages
went in, but not other stuff.  Also, it doesn't appear that any of the
LVM changes are making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a
recepie for disaster.

Basically, I'm at the point where trying to create clean patches from my
LVM source tree to apply to CVS is so much work it is hardly worth it.
I'm seriously looking at devoting the time I used to spend on LVM to the
EVMS project instead.  They (appear to) have in-kernel LVM support working
already, so no user tools needed for VG/LV activation.  Granted, they don't
yet have tools to create/modify VG/LVs, but I think I can help them there.
It appears more likely that EVMS will only support Linux LVM volumes for
compatibility, and move to a more robust on-disk format for metadata.

The openlvm list may change my mind, I'll see.

Cheers, Andreas
-- 
Andreas Dilger  \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
                 \  would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/               -- Dogbert

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Alan Cox]

> All it would have taken was a request and a good reason for doing so, but
> I guess this is one way to do it.  Just don't complain about spam.  :)

I think you'll find several folks who run linux-kernel and other lists like
the linux.nl mailhub more than happy to help there

Alan

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Alan Cox]

> Not to be negative, but isn't Alan the pot calling the kettle black?  You
> use ORBS to block email as well, with no hope of reprieve.  AFAIK, the

I dont stop other people discussing the kernel. Its very very different.

> linux-lvm list has a moderator which _should_ forward legitimate emails
> on to the list.  Maybe they are piling up somewhere, unread?

If they were that would be understandable but they were being rejected. Anyway
it seems to be a finished discussion. 

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Rik van Riel]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote:

> I don't think that the subscription is necessarily the only
> issue.  I'm subscribed to all of the LVM mailing lists, and
> still a lot of what I submit (legitimate bug fixes, and not just
> features/code cleanup) does not get added to CVS.  Yes, the
> no-possible-harm patches like man pages went in, but not other
> stuff.  Also, it doesn't appear that any of the LVM changes are
> making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a recepie
> for disaster.

This is indeed an even bigger problem.  LVM is no longer just
a Sistina product, it is an integrated part of the Linux kernel.

This brings with it the responsability of maintaining the LVM
subsystem which is included in the kernel. I understand that
Sistina may want to do "LVM releases" every once in a while,
but this isn't a development model that makes much sense when
their code has been integrated into the Linux kernel (IMHO).

> The openlvm list may change my mind, I'll see.

If you think any other openly accessible LVM development things
are needed (maybe a CVS tree which can be used by all LVM
developers and not just the Sistina folks?) .. NL.linux.org is
all yours.

regards,

Rik
--
Linux MM bugzilla: http://linux-mm.org/bugzilla.shtml

Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...

		http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/	http://distro.conectiva.com/

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[AJ Lewis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2880 bytes --]

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:45:20PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> I don't think that the subscription is necessarily the only issue.  I'm
> subscribed to all of the LVM mailing lists, and still a lot of what I
> submit (legitimate bug fixes, and not just features/code cleanup) does
> not get added to CVS.  Yes, the no-possible-harm patches like man pages
> went in, but not other stuff.  Also, it doesn't appear that any of the
> LVM changes are making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a
> recepie for disaster.

Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment.  It
would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
review.  Linus does the exact same thing.  I've said this before to you
Andreas, but apparently you feel that you should have final say on whether
your patches go in or not.

As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in.  Maybe
someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.

> Basically, I'm at the point where trying to create clean patches from my
> LVM source tree to apply to CVS is so much work it is hardly worth it.
> I'm seriously looking at devoting the time I used to spend on LVM to the
> EVMS project instead.  They (appear to) have in-kernel LVM support working
> already, so no user tools needed for VG/LV activation.  Granted, they don't
> yet have tools to create/modify VG/LVs, but I think I can help them there.
> It appears more likely that EVMS will only support Linux LVM volumes for
> compatibility, and move to a more robust on-disk format for metadata.
>
> The openlvm list may change my mind, I'll see.
> 
> Cheers, Andreas
> -- 
> Andreas Dilger  \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
>                  \  would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
> http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/               -- Dogbert
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm

-- 
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc.                  Voice:  612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111              Fax:    612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414                  E-Mail: lewis@sistina.com
http://www.sistina.com

Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B  52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
 (Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)

-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
Carpe Aptenodytes! (Seize the Penguins!)
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:45:20PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> I don't think that the subscription is necessarily the only issue.  I'm
> subscribed to all of the LVM mailing lists, and still a lot of what I
> submit (legitimate bug fixes, and not just features/code cleanup) does
> not get added to CVS.

Just alone the fact that you as number one submitter of LVM-bugfixes since
at least 0.8 do not get CVS write access is a sign of closedness for me.

But we discussed that on the sistina list.

> Yes, the no-possible-harm patches like man pages
> went in, but not other stuff.  Also, it doesn't appear that any of the
> LVM changes are making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a
> recepie for disaster.

100% True.  A few days ago I looke at the LVM patches to see what parts
of it could be fed to Linus in small pieces - but it's such a _huge_
mixture of bugfixes, cleanups and move-arounds that it looks pretty
much impossible.

> Basically, I'm at the point where trying to create clean patches from my
> LVM source tree to apply to CVS is so much work it is hardly worth it.

IMHO wou should just put _your_ tree on a sever and submit it (in pieces)
to Linus.  AFAIK all serious users of LVM have used you're patched versions.

Maybe openlvm is a good hood for such a project?

> I'm seriously looking at devoting the time I used to spend on LVM to the
> EVMS project instead.  They (appear to) have in-kernel LVM support working
> already, so no user tools needed for VG/LV activation.  Granted, they don't
> yet have tools to create/modify VG/LVs, but I think I can help them there.

Yes - when looking at what code they produces it looks a _lot_ cleaner than
Linux-LVM and while the papers had serious signs of Overengeering the
actual code looks very good to me - it could just get a little better
integrated with the main kernel, but that's a 2.5 issue.

	Christoph

-- 
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Jens Axboe]

On Thu, Apr 19 2001, AJ Lewis wrote:
> As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in.  Maybe
> someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.

The diff between 2.4.4-pre LVM and your last beta is HUGE. That's a very
good clue why Linus hasn't taken it! Find a bug, fix it, submit diff.
Not find lots of bugs for a month, submit huge diff.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Alan Cox]

> As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in.  Maybe
> someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.

Has it occured to you that some of this might be because the code does stuff
like hide flags in the low bits of addresses and do unchecked kmallocs ?
Things people have tried to send patches for ..

The best way to get stuff to Linus is to feed him changes one at a time and
make them all clean and clearly correct. When I have a big set of changes I
normally start by feeding Linus all the 'fluff' - spelling checks and small
warning fixes. After that its normally easy to pick out changes one at a time
and feed them on.

Given 500 lines of mixed up diff it is very hard to verify the correctness of
anything. 

Alan

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Jeff Garzik]

AJ Lewis wrote:
> Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment.  It
> would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
> review.  Linus does the exact same thing.  I've said this before to you
> Andreas, but apparently you feel that you should have final say on whether
> your patches go in or not.

> As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in.  Maybe
> someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.

Read Documentation/SubmittingPatches, and also listen to kernel hackers
who know the block layer and want to fix lvm.

And I wonder, if kernel hackers are saying lvm is broken... why do you
want to freeze it and ship it in that state?

-- 
Jeff Garzik       | "The universe is like a safe to which there is a
Building 1024     |  combination -- but the combination is locked up
MandrakeSoft      |  in the safe."    -- Peter DeVries

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[AJ Lewis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1985 bytes --]

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 04:09:32PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> AJ Lewis wrote:
> > Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> > that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment.  It
> > would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
> > review.  Linus does the exact same thing.  I've said this before to you
> > Andreas, but apparently you feel that you should have final say on whether
> > your patches go in or not.
> 
> > As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> > to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in.  Maybe
> > someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
> 
> Read Documentation/SubmittingPatches, and also listen to kernel hackers
> who know the block layer and want to fix lvm.
> 
> And I wonder, if kernel hackers are saying lvm is broken... why do you
> want to freeze it and ship it in that state?

Hmm...perhaps I didn't make myself clear.  AFAIK Heinz is not putting
cosmetic changes into the CVS.  The team should be putting fixes in.  If
they aren't it's because they are dealing with backlog.

As far as the smaller patches go.  I know.  We're working on it; really we
are.

Regards,
-- 
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc.                  Voice:  612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111              Fax:    612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414                  E-Mail: lewis@sistina.com
http://www.sistina.com

Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B  52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
 (Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)

-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
There's nary an animal alive that can outrun a greased Scotsman.
   - Groundskeeper Willie
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Kurt Garloff]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1501 bytes --]

Hi AJ,

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 02:40:15PM -0500, AJ Lewis wrote:
> The list is now open.  I've talked to our admin and he's opening it up.
> Send me e-mail if it doesn't work, 'cause something else is broken.

to me it looks like your reactions are too late.

I suggest you Sistina people accept the fact the there is an open list
(better) managed by somebody else now and you all move there and use this as
a forum for your discussions from now on. Just send the new list admin a
list with your people to be subscribed ... and I can not imagine they will
refuse to help you. (Otherwise they would be as closed-minded as you were.)

Maintaining a project which got integrated into the kernel and forms a
critical part of it (if there are bugs) is not an easy thing to do, and you
should expect controversary discussions. On the one hand you want to fix
things and introduce small and large improvements, on the other hand you
don't want to take risks. Just get used to it.

You'll always have a newer version to test than the one in the kernel.
However, it works best if you try to submit your changes as often as
possible. Of course I know, this is close to impossible when you have to
redesign stuff and have to wait for stabilization ...

Good luck!
-- 
Kurt Garloff  <garloff@suse.de>                          Eindhoven, NL
GPG key: See mail header, key servers         Linux kernel development
SuSE GmbH, Nuernberg, FRG                               SCSI, Security

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 233 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Miles Lane]

Alan Cox wrote:

>>As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
>>to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in.  Maybe
>>someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
>>
> 
> Has it occured to you that some of this might be because the code does stuff
> like hide flags in the low bits of addresses and do unchecked kmallocs ?
> Things people have tried to send patches for ..
> 
> The best way to get stuff to Linus is to feed him changes one at a time and
> make them all clean and clearly correct. When I have a big set of changes I
> normally start by feeding Linus all the 'fluff' - spelling checks and small
> warning fixes. After that its normally easy to pick out changes one at a time
> and feed them on.
> 
> Given 500 lines of mixed up diff it is very hard to verify the correctness of
> anything. 


The IrDA folks have had a similar struggle.  AJ, perhaps it would be
helpful for you to read the discussion that took place regarding getting
a bunch of IrDA code merged into the 2.4 tree:

http://www.pasta.cs.uit.no/pipermail/linux-irda/2000-November/001923.html

Dag Brattli <dagb@fast.no> eventually had a discussion with Linus and
hashed out what he needed to do to get Linus to accept his big patch. 
It all
worked out very well, IIRC.

	Miles

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Andreas Dilger]

AJ writes:
> Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment.

Actually, the whole idea of "trying to get a release out" is part of the
problem.  If patches were included into CVS and sent sent to Linus as they
arrived we wouldn't be in this situation.  My take on this is that holding
back legitimate patches "to get the release out" ends up accumulating so
many changes that it is impossible to sync up later. The Linux kernel is a
successful project because Linus generally accepts everything that is a 
bug fix or code cleanup (features are another matter, but very little if
any of the patches I send you are "features").

> It would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
> review.  Linus does the exact same thing.

Yes, it would be stupid to "just accept everything" that is sent to the
mailing list, but really, I've done a pretty good job of submitting patches
in small, self-contained pieces IMHO (even if it happens that I send a lot
of such patches at one time).  I mean the code has to be cleaned up at some
time, so we may as well do it sooner rather than later.

> I've said this before to you Andreas, but apparently you feel that you
> should have final say on whether your patches go in or not.

Well, I would hope that given the fact I've been working on LVM considerably
longer than anyone else at Sistina (excluding Heinz) that you might just
trust my judgement a bit more.  I'm _trying_ to contribute to LVM, and do
so in easy-to-digest pieces, but given that it is hard to get patches into
CVS, and my codebase is increasingly divergent from your CVS tree.

I have better ways to spend my time than going through 10,000 lines of
diff and guessing which parts are new, and which parts have been held of
"for the next release".  The EVMS code is starting out clean, and I hope
I can help keep it that way.

> As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in.  Maybe
> someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.

That's because the "release" patches are too huge now.  If it were up to me,
and I've asked you a couple of times on this, I would have already sent a
whole bunch of bug fixes to Linus as small, self-contained patches.  However,
I held back because you asked me not to send patches to Linus directly.

Cheers, Andreas
-- 
Andreas Dilger  \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
                 \  would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/               -- Dogbert

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Paul Jakma]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote:

> went in, but not other stuff.  Also, it doesn't appear that any of the
> LVM changes are making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a
> recepie for disaster.

agreed... after the problematic inclusion of 0.9 into the kernel i
asked on sistina LVM list whether they could try to be a bit more
proactive about feeding patches on to linus, to make life easier for
LVM users - they had fixes for the problems of 0.9 but never, and
still to this day have not, fed the code on.

Still to this day, nothing from them but announcements on l-k of
various betas. AFAIK all the patches for LVM submitted to linus since
0.8 went in have been from core linux developers (Andrea, Jens,
etc.), not sistina.

shame... their LVM is really nice to use. Just frustrating that they
do want to feed the code on... more frustrating still when you
consider the lobbying that went on to try persuade l-k that LVM
should go in.

> Cheers, Andreas

obHiddenCode: lm-sensors... used to use this a long time ago.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	paul@clubi.ie	paul@jakma.org
PGP5 key: http://www.clubi.ie/jakma/publickey.txt
-------------------------------------------
Fortune:
Happiness is twin floppies.

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Luca Berra]

Fuck!  I hate these things early in the morning.

what gets me extremely pissed in the whole business is that i don't
believe that splitting the mailing list is the solution to LVM problems.
Escpecially since we have a number of lusers of lwm at the time being.

I believe sistina is mostly at fault there, not for the mailing list issue
(i really don't believe people getting kicked out, while the moderation
messages are probably due to mailman braindamage)
but for political reasons (stop making it look as a sistina-only project, it pisses
everyone)

we have some serous problems here.

an lvm in the kernel which is badly broken(tm)

a better lvm (still buggy according to many kernel hackers, but better still),
which does not get into the kernel for communication reasons. (Alan can you help?
there is a lot of stuff that goes in -ac before going to mainstream)

A development model where only sistina people have access to cvs. This is bad, has the only
effect of pissing off people like Andreas which has been feeding patches and good ideas for
many months now, besides it leads to people having their own lvm tree, so everybody is
testing their development version, which has nothing to do with the version in the
goddamned kernel.

now what i propose is (some has already been said):
lets's vote for which mailing list we want to keep (and everybody accept the result)

open the goddam cvs to hackers that request access to it, you can use different branches
and do code freezes with cvs, so it won't hurt releases schedules.

try to ship the most evident bugfixes from cvs to linus, please all long-time kernel hakcers
who got involved in this help do this.

open up also the decision process (IOP 11 in beta5 and IOP 10 back in beta6
could not have happened if somebody eles knew about the IOP change.)

Regards,
L.

(Sorry for the big CC list, but i dunno who is subscribed to what anymore)



-- 
Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it
        Communication Media & Services S.r.l.
 /"\
 \ /     ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
  X        AGAINST HTML MAIL
 / \

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Jeff Garzik]

Luca Berra wrote:
> we have some serous problems here.
[...]
> a better lvm (still buggy according to many kernel hackers, but better still),
> which does not get into the kernel for communication reasons. (Alan can you help?
> there is a lot of stuff that goes in -ac before going to mainstream)

I do not think this is a communication problem at all, but a clear lack
of understanding (perhaps willful) on the part of the "LVM maintainers"
about how to get things into the kernel.

linux/Documentation/SubmittingPatches exist to bonk people on the head
if they are screwing up, and it sounds like such is occurring now.

Quite simply,

1) Split up your patches.  How many times does it have to be said? 
Think ONE CHANGE, ONE PATCH.  Big patches full of tons of disparate
changes are impossible to review.

2) (parroting Linus)  Open source is about lack of control, not hoarding
code and lording over it.  That's why Linus will take a patch from Jens
or another knowledgeable person who says "this LVM code is broken,
-here- is a fix." -- regardless of who the "official" maintainer of the
code is listed as...

[Luca, this is not directed at you, I just used this message as an
opportunity to spout :)]

-- 
Jeff Garzik       | "The universe is like a safe to which there is a
Building 1024     |  combination -- but the combination is locked up
MandrakeSoft      |  in the safe."    -- Peter DeVries

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Patrick Caulfield]

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 04:09:32PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> AJ Lewis wrote:
> > Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> > that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment.  It
> > would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
> > review.  Linus does the exact same thing.  I've said this before to you
> > Andreas, but apparently you feel that you should have final say on whether
> > your patches go in or not.
> 
> > As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> > to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in.  Maybe
> > someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
> 
> Read Documentation/SubmittingPatches, and also listen to kernel hackers
> who know the block layer and want to fix lvm.

OK, we're in the process of splitting the big patch up into nice clean small
patches to go to Linus. Hopefully this should be done today, or very shortly at
least.


patrick

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list

[Wichert Akkerman]

Previously Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote:
> Linux LVM is a Sistina GPL project and there's no danger at all
> that we want to change its GPL nature!

I think the general sentiment is that LVM is a Linux project,
currently being managed by Sistina. 

Also, since you have merged patches from other you no longer can
change the license since Sistina is not the sole copyright holder.

Wichert.

-- 
   ________________________________________________________________
 / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience  \
| wichert@cistron.nl                  http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |