From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932469AbWG3WCT (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Jul 2006 18:02:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932475AbWG3WCT (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Jul 2006 18:02:19 -0400 Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:53978 "EHLO out2.smtp.messagingengine.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932469AbWG3WCS (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Jul 2006 18:02:18 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: 6ZDPef5Aqe1EEU/UIukh0pZ9kRDWKd9kLtB75T2hpXL+ 1154296940 Message-ID: <44CD2C76.2030700@imap.cc> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:02:30 +0200 From: Tilman Schmidt Organization: me - organized?? User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; de-AT; rv:1.8.0.5) Gecko/20060721 SeaMonkey/1.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Reiser4 Inclusion References: <06Jul25.011533edt.35900@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> In-Reply-To: <06Jul25.011533edt.35900@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigE99FECA8BB1CD7FEB57C108C" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigE99FECA8BB1CD7FEB57C108C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 25.07.2006 07:15, Chris Siebenmann wrote: > You write: > | [...] Therefore an attitude which says "go on developing that > | code out-of-tree, it's not ready for inclusion yet" is in direct > | contradiction with the foundations of the no-stable-API policy. >=20 > I don't think that there's a contradiction, because I believe that wha= t > the kernel developers are saying in general can be rewritten as: >=20 > - we don't care about things that are deliberately kept > out of the kernel > *and* - we also don't care about code that does not meet quality > or relevance standards Actually, that *isn't* what I read regularly in lkml. Most statements of rejection by kernel developers do *not* read "we don't care about that, go away", but "this needs work here and there before we will accept it", which in a way is the opposite of "we don't care". But I am growing tired of this discussion. I tried to help, and instead drew fire myself. My own fault of course. I misjudged the situation and the emotional content of the ongoing dispute. I will now keep my tongue. Regards Tilman PS: I was forced to give this answer publicly because your given E-mail address wouldn't accept my private mail answer. My apologies if this is not what you wanted. --=20 Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: tilman@imap.cc Bonn, Germany Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits. Unge=F6ffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe R=FCckseite) --------------enigE99FECA8BB1CD7FEB57C108C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3rc1 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEzSx/MdB4Whm86/kRAp7zAJ0crnTZ+0+i1UTYf9UnFktG/WYLIACdHmDG 4F6IjXs1F7rLa/vWop9l6Jo= =vPi4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigE99FECA8BB1CD7FEB57C108C--