[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/7] OMFS filesystem version 3
    On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 01:11:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:24:32 +0300
    > Adrian Bunk <> wrote:
    > > > Look, I have repeatedly described the reason why it is probable a poor
    > > > tradeoff to merge code such as this. The only response has been "well
    > > > we've done it before", which is largely a non-reason.
    > > >...
    > >
    > > It seems you missed the first point in my email:
    > >
    > > We do not have a stable API for external modules, and part of the deal
    > > is that external modules have the chance of entering the kernel where
    > > they will get API changes automatically.
    > >
    > >
    > > Plus my other point that one might argue that OMFS adds support for some
    > > hardware in which case a recent commandment by Linus would require it
    > > has to be merged...
    > That's lawyerly trickery, sorry. Take some set of guidelines and then say
    > "you are thereby committed to doing X".
    > We're not committed to doing anything and it would be bad if we were.
    > Let's apply common sense and judgement to each case on its own.

    My favorite gems from the stuff even checkpatch finds in the
    INFINIBAND_NES driver, for which Linus has stated explicitely that
    merging it in this state in 2.6.25 was correct, can be seen with

    grep -C4 volatile drivers/infiniband/hw/nes/nes_nic.c

    When we have the resources to maintain this kind of code, how could a
    small filesystem be a problem?



    "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
    of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
    "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
    Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-04-15 22:31    [W:0.036 / U:38.332 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site