From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753278AbZEDGt6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2009 02:49:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752018AbZEDGtp (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2009 02:49:45 -0400 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:49818 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751598AbZEDGto (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2009 02:49:44 -0400 To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: tridge@samba.org, Al Viro , Pavel Machek , Christoph Hellwig , Matthew Wilcox , Steve French , Dave Kleikamp , Ogawa Hirofumi , linux-fsdevel , Michael Tokarev , LKML References: <524f69650905011318m34e0027dt57877d225b3fe2da@mail.gmail.com> <20090501210109.GA3079@infradead.org> <20090502013729.GI6996@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090503225616.GD8633@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <18942.9606.411013.714178@samba.org> <20090504063431.GK7141@linux.vnet.ibm.com> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 23:49:29 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20090504063431.GK7141@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (Paul E. McKenney's message of "Sun\, 3 May 2009 23\:34\:31 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=67.169.126.145;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 67.169.126.145 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mjt@tls.msk.ru, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp, shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, smfrench@gmail.com, matthew@wil.cx, hch@infradead.org, pavel@ucw.cz, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, tridge@samba.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa03 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Report: * -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -0.2 BAYES_40 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 20 to 40% * [score: 0.3632] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa03 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 XM_SPF_Neutral SPF-Neutral * 0.4 UNTRUSTED_Relay Comes from a non-trusted relay Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add CONFIG_VFAT_NO_CREATE_WITH_LONGNAMES option X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 25 Oct 2007 00:26:12 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Paul E. McKenney" writes: > On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 10:42:52PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> The only reason I can see for not ultimately talking about things publicly >> is if this is one company making shady deals with another company in which >> case I do not see why the maintenance burden for those decision should >> fall on the linux community as a whole. > > Another reason is that past experience would indicate that anything we > say in public and and will be used against us. Which is a fine reason to be careful what you say, and to say reasonable things. It is not a reason to submit a patch without justification. If the reason for submitting a patch is not sufficiently good to be held to then it appears insufficient to merge the patch. Why should the commit to a position at your urging that you aren't willing to commit to? Eric