Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 30 Sep 1998 16:09:21 +0200 (CEST) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: jitterbug |
| |
On Wed, 30 Sep 1998, Keith Owens wrote:
>With respect, what is also missing is a statement that we should (or >should not) be using jitterbug. It is a fairly well kept secret, no >mention at all anywhere in the source or the FAQ. A search of the
Agreed. I was not aware of such patch queue before now ;-).
>Note: jitterbug or something like it is a good idea. It just needs to > be more visible and official.
I never used it and I don' t like it. This because my poor ppp connection is slow everywhere. The only TCP reliable service here is smtp (because it' s off-line of course ;-).
I will feel confortable with jitterbug if somebody would act as a mail->jitterbug filter for me ;-).
Right now I am _very_ confortable with sending my few patches to Linus because it' s via email.
I also suggest everybody has a patch to post it on linux-kernel or to public an URL so I can use it even if it won' t fit in the next official kernel.
Thanks.
Andrea[s] Arcangeli
- 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/
| |