From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965461AbXDNSsz (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:48:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965528AbXDNSsz (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:48:55 -0400 Received: from adsl-69-232-92-238.dsl.sndg02.pacbell.net ([69.232.92.238]:52005 "EHLO gnuppy.monkey.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965461AbXDNSsy (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:48:54 -0400 Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 11:48:38 -0700 To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Willy Tarreau , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Con Kolivas , Nick Piggin , Mike Galbraith , Arjan van de Ven , Thomas Gleixner , "Bill Huey (hui)" Subject: Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS] Message-ID: <20070414184838.GB17993@gnuppy.monkey.org> References: <20070413202100.GA9957@elte.hu> <20070413223131.GA1642@1wt.eu> <20070413231809.GA15894@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070413231809.GA15894@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: Bill Huey (hui) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 01:18:09AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > very much so! Both Con and Mike has contributed regularly to upstream > sched.c: The problem here is tha Con can get demotivated (and rather upset) when an idea gets proposed, like SchedPlug, only to have people be hostile to it and then sudden turn around an adopt this idea. It give the impression that you, in this specific case, were more interested in controlling a situation and the track of development instead of actually being inclusive of the development process with discussion and serious consideration, etc... This is how the Linux community can be perceived as elitist. The old guard would serve the community better if people were more mindful and sensitive to developer issues. There was a particular speech that I was turned off by at OLS 2006 that pretty much pandering to the "old guard's" needs over newer developers. Since I'm a some what established engineer in -rt (being the only other person that mapped the lock hierarchy out for full preemptibility), I had the confidence to pretty much ignored it while previously this could have really upset me and be highly discouraging to a relatively new developer. As Linux gets larger and larger this is going to be an increasing problem when folks come into the community with new ideas and the community will need to change if it intends to integrate these folks. IMO, a lot of these flame ware wouldn't need to exist if folks listent ot each other better and permit co-ownership of code like the scheduler since it needs multipule hands in it adapt to new loads and situations, etc... I'm saying this nicely now since I can be nasty about it. bill