From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762067AbYHEP4j (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 11:56:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761456AbYHEP41 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 11:56:27 -0400 Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.171.30]:43578 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761372AbYHEP40 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 11:56:26 -0400 Message-ID: <48987829.1060002@sgi.com> Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 08:56:25 -0700 From: Mike Travis User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H. Peter Anvin" CC: Kyle Moffett , Russ Anderson , mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jack Steiner Subject: Re: x86 BIOS interface for partitioning and system serial number on SGI UV References: <20080731195753.GB25715@sgi.com> <48934926.2010200@zytor.com> <20080804221951.GA252105@sgi.com> <4898654A.9000904@sgi.com> <4898745F.2070902@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <4898745F.2070902@zytor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Mike Travis wrote: >> >> Hi Kyle, >> >> As I'm very new to this development arena, could you explain a bit more >> on why this is considered "bad manners"? >> >> I'm not speaking of any particular change, but there are some >> realities in >> bringing a new product to market that depends heavily on new "features" >> being accepted into a specific kernel release. I certainly do not want >> to "taint" any kernel code (and I'm always amazed at the dedication of >> so many individuals to insure this doesn't happen), but the line between >> acceptability (and not) seems to waver all over the place... ;-) >> > > It's because it's your responsibility to get the code in by whenever you > need it to, but trying to push unfinished code with the motivation "we > need it in by " violates the development model *and* is just > plain rude. > > This comes down to the old saying "lack of planning on your part does > not constitute an emergency on my part." > > In other words, if you want to push code in by a specific release, the > code needs to be *done* and properly submitted. Submitting code that > has a big "real code goes here" comment, is ridiculous. > > Unfortunately we have seen a *lot* of that from several people at SGI > over the last year. > > -hpa Hi Peter, Ok, thanks, I do see your point (very clearly), as I prepare yet another "we really, really need this" patch... ;-) [ok, it's only a led driver and the world won't stop if it doesn't show up in the kernel... ;-)] Cheers, Mike