From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>
To: Johann Borck <johann.borck@densedata.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Zach Brown <zach.brown@oracle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Chase Venters <chase.venters@clientec.com>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>, Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: considering kevent - the kernel development process
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:24:07 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070314132405.GA14500@2ka.mipt.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45F6F590.8030909@densedata.com>
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:03:44PM +0100, Johann Borck (johann.borck@densedata.com) wrote:
> So my questions are:
>
> What in general is wrong with kevent?
>
> What, in detail is wrong with kevent / its proposed interface?
>
> What features are missing?
>
> What are the (real) reasons for the way it is discussed?
Fsck it, Johann :)
It is a trend (a politics) to hide head into the sand and feel like
nothing happend - open source does not have mechanisms to force people
to do something (like comment on foreign ideas/implementations),
so people make a look like problem does not exist and solve it using own way.
There will be tons of other interesting stuff, stay tuned :)
--
Evgeniy Polyakov
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-14 13:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-13 19:03 Johann Borck
2007-03-13 19:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-03-13 20:13 ` Avi Kivity
2007-03-14 13:24 ` Evgeniy Polyakov [this message]
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=20070314132405.GA14500@2ka.mipt.ru \
--to=johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=chase.venters@clientec.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=johann.borck@densedata.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=zach.brown@oracle.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome