From: Karim Yaghmour <karim@opersys.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
Karim Yaghmour <karim@opersys.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Tom Zanussi <zanussi@us.ibm.com>,
Richard J Moore <richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>,
Michel Dagenais <michel.dagenais@polymtl.ca>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
William Cohen <wcohen@redhat.com>,
"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org>
Subject: Re: tracing - consensus building insteat of dogfights
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 09:45:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <450FF48B.60703@opersys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060919125801.GA12815@infradead.org>
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I've been half-way through reading this thread after returning, and I must
> say I'm rather annoyed that 80% of it is just Roman vs Ingo and Karim vs
> Jes dogfights that run in circles. Let's try to find some majority optinion
> and plans to move forward:
Well, I believed such a consensus had been achieved and that somehow
Ingo and I had reached some friendly terms:
See this:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=115855453205733&w=2
And this:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=115855674320139&w=2
Then this:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=115855674231992&w=2
For me, the fighting could have stopped there, but then Ingo saw it
fitting to post this:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=115859172307516&w=2
I still don't get how Ingo goes from friendly and compromising to
then attempting the worst kind of character assassination I've seen
on lkml. The only way it makes sense is if Ingo's understanding was
that Jes' email, to which he is responding, was responding to an email
I had sent after telling Ingo that the fighting was over. And that
would be simple to understand, within this humongous thread confusion
is more than likely. Though the inverse (friendly then angry) would
just make Ingo one of the most irrational persons I've come across.
My nitpicking in this last paragraph sounds absolutely silly, but it's
really quite important because if cleared up it would at least go to
show that one of two main protagonists in this issue had indeed
agreed to put disagreement aside. I've asked Ingo privately to
clear this up, but haven't gotten any response, maybe he was just
too angry and killfilled me since.
In any case, I'm more than happy to settle for the friendly end-
of-discussion terms.
Karim
--
President / Opersys Inc.
Embedded Linux Training and Expertise
www.opersys.com / 1.866.677.4546
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-19 13:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-17 9:40 The emperor is naked: why *comprehensive* static markup belongs in mainline Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-17 11:21 ` Paul Mundt
2006-09-17 14:36 ` tracepoint maintainance models Ingo Molnar
2006-09-17 15:02 ` Roman Zippel
2006-09-17 15:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-17 17:18 ` Roman Zippel
2006-09-17 23:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-17 23:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 0:17 ` Roman Zippel
2006-09-18 9:01 ` Jes Sorensen
2006-09-17 20:37 ` Roman Zippel
2006-09-17 22:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-17 15:36 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-09-18 0:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 1:12 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 1:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 2:32 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 2:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 3:54 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 4:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 4:43 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 2:43 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-09-18 3:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 4:26 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-09-18 5:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 12:25 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-09-18 15:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 15:45 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-09-18 15:48 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-18 15:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 16:19 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-18 16:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 17:02 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-18 16:15 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-09-18 17:02 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-18 17:27 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-09-18 18:04 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-18 17:54 ` Martin Bligh
2006-09-18 18:05 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-09-18 19:10 ` Vara Prasad
2006-09-18 19:49 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-18 19:39 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-09-18 20:28 ` Vara Prasad
2006-10-06 5:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-10-06 13:01 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-10-06 14:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-10-06 23:17 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-18 15:47 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-09-18 15:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 16:30 ` MARKER mechanism, try 2 Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-09-18 16:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 17:47 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-09-18 19:39 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-17 20:19 ` tracepoint maintainance models Nicholas Miell
2006-09-17 23:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 0:05 ` Roman Zippel
2006-09-18 1:52 ` Theodore Tso
2006-09-19 12:58 ` tracing - consensus building insteat of dogfights Christoph Hellwig
2006-09-19 13:25 ` Roman Zippel
2006-09-19 13:45 ` Karim Yaghmour [this message]
2006-09-19 14:25 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 0:10 ` tracepoint maintainance models Nicholas Miell
2006-09-18 0:43 ` Roman Zippel
2006-09-18 0:56 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 0:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 2:09 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 3:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 3:52 ` Theodore Tso
2006-09-18 4:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 4:24 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 4:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 5:03 ` LTTng and SystemTAP (Everyone who is scared to read this huge thread, skip to here) Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-09-18 15:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-23 15:50 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-09-18 5:37 ` tracepoint maintainance models Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 20:12 ` Michel Dagenais
2006-09-18 4:14 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 4:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-18 4:57 ` Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 1:03 ` The emperor is naked: why *comprehensive* static markup belongs in mainline Karim Yaghmour
2006-09-18 15:53 ` Jose R. Santos
2006-09-18 17:28 ` Karim Yaghmour
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=450FF48B.60703@opersys.com \
--to=karim@opersys.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jes@sgi.com \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mbligh@mbligh.org \
--cc=michel.dagenais@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nmiell@comcast.net \
--cc=richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=wcohen@redhat.com \
--cc=zanussi@us.ibm.com \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox