Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 30 Sep 1998 11:27:46 +0930 (CST) | From | Michael Talbot-Wilson <> | Subject | Re: Personalities and progress |
| |
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998, Eric Princen wrote:
> Hi all, > > I just wanted to quickly state that when geniuses come together, there are > going to be conflicts. Strong egos can be both good and bad things, so lets > just make sure we understand the way things are. I'm sure there is a good > amount of pressure Linus is going through at Transmeta with the mystery > chip(s) and trying to get 2.2.0 out sometime this millenium. He has final > say on Linux. Period. It's his baby. Sometimes we may need to step back and
If a clueless onlooker can get half a word into this colloquy of geniuses, there is no point in vger if the vger patches can't go in unexamined by Linus. If it is admitted that Linus can absolutely demand that bugs and bloat found to have been added be taken out in the next vger patch file accepted, the remaining problem (if I guess rightly) is that he thinks he may be embarrassed by stuff that he didn't know was there, that he has decided must come out, but that there is not yet any replacement for and that some people have become dependent on.
Remember Richard Gooch's furious complaints when stuff he had based his development on was taken out without notice to him.
The way forward may be threefold.
(a) Promote Linus even higher into the pantheon of the gods by agreeing here that when he requires anything whatsoever taken out it is done without any discussion, and that those who complain in the list about it are to be ignored.
(b) Expand the role of the Changes editor to clearly designate unapproved vger functionality in the official kernel.
(c) Agree that in any case Linus is not bound by his approval or acceptance of any patch to the development kernel.
--Mike
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |