From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762213AbXH3Oud (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 10:50:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757708AbXH3OuN (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 10:50:13 -0400 Received: from [212.12.190.120] ([212.12.190.120]:33051 "EHLO raad.intranet" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761913AbXH3OuK (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 10:50:10 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: Adrian Bunk Subject: Re: Designers and Builders (was: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases?) Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 17:50:20 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200708300731.24413.a1426z@gawab.com> <200708301654.24516.a1426z@gawab.com> <20070830141746.GC9260@stusta.de> In-Reply-To: <20070830141746.GC9260@stusta.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200708301750.20873.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 04:54:24PM +0300, Al Boldi wrote: > > Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 07:31:24AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote: > > > > Adrian Bunk wrote > > > > > > > > > Tracking feature or implementation suggestions wouldn't make > > > > > sense. Consider e.g. that there are several people on linux-kernel > > > > > who often write what they think the kernel should do but who never > > > > > write a single line of code themselves. There's no value in > > > > > tracking such stuff. > > > > > > > > There are designers, and there are builders. > > > > > > > > Can you tell me who is more important? > > > > > > That's a distinction that doesn't exist in practice: > > > > > > Designing kernel features requires good knowledge of the area of the > > > kernel that should be changed. > > > > > > IOW: If you don't have the skills to implement it yourself you don't > > > have the skills to do any good design. > > > > I might agree with you on this wrt hacking around the kernel, but when > > it comes to introducing new subsystems, then we have a two fold > > situation: > > > > 1. Designing the internals of the new subsystem > > 2. Interfacing it with the rest of the kernel > > > > Part 1 is completely independent of the implementation, it's part 2 that > > needs intricate implementation knowledge. > > That's a perfect approach that works NOT. > > Your subsystem needs to interact with the VFS or the block layer or > whatever else parts of the kernel. > > If you had ever written kernel code you would have known that your > statement wasn't true. > > > We recently had an example of this: kexec based hibernation > > > > So, what's wrong with tapping into people's design suggestions, and > > allowing others to implement it? > > People soon realize that you are making a fool of yourself when your > suggestions show that you don't have a clue what you are talking about. > > There's nothing wrong if this is the desired effect... I really didn't expect this kind of a response, but I guess when somebody runs out of arguments, then that's probably one of the responses to expect. Really sad. Thanks anyway! -- Al