From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758121AbZGCPs7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:48:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756937AbZGCPsv (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:48:51 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:50219 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756332AbZGCPsv (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:48:51 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 17:48:45 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] vt: add an event interface Message-ID: <20090703154845.GB13580@elte.hu> References: <20090703091655.GB3902@elte.hu> <20090703104459.1d9d0bbf@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090703095432.GC21141@elte.hu> <20090703110620.64fd1283@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090703102234.GA32128@elte.hu> <20090703114431.37abd528@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090703131727.GA3207@elte.hu> <20090703143746.0379b2ee@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090703144754.GA13246@elte.hu> <20090703160230.093e422c@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090703160230.093e422c@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0024] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Alan Cox wrote: > > The thing is, you didnt really answer my question whether you > > consider yourself to be accountable to the same standards of > > quality as other upstream kernel contributors? > > I did answer it, I guess you didn't like the answer ? You did not answer it really, you questioned the validity of the question: | > Also, isnt it a double standard: why should newbies be held to | > higher standards than you hold yourself to? | | Why should anyone be held up to bogus standards ? | | [...] So did i get you right that in your opinion sending and writing clean code is a 'bogus standard'? Sorry about trying to interpret you here, i have no choice because you did not reply to my question. I thought the obvious portions of Documentation/CodingStyle applied to everyone - so it applies to you only if you like it? Ingo