From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758018AbbCDACD (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2015 19:02:03 -0500 Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:37408 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756946AbbCDACA (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2015 19:02:00 -0500 Message-ID: <54F64B75.3010109@iogearbox.net> Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2015 01:01:57 +0100 From: Daniel Borkmann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michel Machado , netdev@vger.kernel.org CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux XIA - merge proposal References: <54F5EF6E.9090303@digirati.com.br> In-Reply-To: <54F5EF6E.9090303@digirati.com.br> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-Sender: daniel@iogearbox.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/03/2015 06:29 PM, Michel Machado wrote: ... > We're fine with clearly marking Linux XIA as being under staging as well as helping to define this review process for network stacks. With regard to staging, the code there is usually horrible and I'm not sure anyone really looks there, that would mitigate the review problem to the time when you try to get it out from there, so I'm not sure it brings anything. ;) +1 on what Eric said, would have also been nice if you had clearly described in your mail (w/o buzz words) what it is and what it does. Are you trying to introduce a new network stack as an alternative to the current one, e.g. something like FreeBSD's netgraph?