From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 24 May 2002 17:58:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 24 May 2002 17:58:00 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:25987 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 24 May 2002 17:57:59 -0400 Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 14:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20020524.144305.88932392.davem@redhat.com> To: xavier.bestel@free.fr Cc: dent@cosy.sbg.ac.at, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, tori@ringstrom.mine.nu, imipak@yahoo.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux crypto? From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <1022276970.4174.153.camel@bip> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Xavier Bestel Date: 24 May 2002 23:49:29 +0200 Why ? You can make all edits you like, they just won't be folded back to their tree. You can retrieve all their fixes, just if you have an important change to do in their core, do it as free speech on their public mailing list, do not provide a patch. I can't edit their code because effectively I could contaminate their sources. Say I make some global networking API change, and this required a significant edit to ipsec to make it comply with the new structure layout or whatever. And let's assume there is only one clear way to implement the change, no other way to do the change would make any sense at all. So the IPSEC people would have to effectively avoid integrating my change, ie. it is a big onus on them to make their version of the API update different enough from my edits so that nobody can claim they just applied my change. And the fact that there would be two edits makes no sense. If a change has to occur twice in two different ways this makes merging a disaster. So someone quips "just let them edit and just merge from IPSEC" and I say I refuse to let something just sit in the tree that I cannot edit when I want to make sweeping changes across the tree. That is unacceptable.