lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Aix7xxx unstable in 2.4.21-rc2? (RE: Linux 2.4.21-rc2)


    On Mon, 26 May 2003, Willy Tarreau wrote:

    > On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 03:42:42PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
    >
    > > Splitting up the work with someone is senseless, IMO. As I said before,
    > > 2.4.22-pre should be better in that aspect. In case it doesnt, I'm giving
    > > up 2.4.x maintenance.
    >
    > Marcelo,
    >
    > Reading your words, I have the sad feeling that you take no interest in doing
    > this job, and that you do it only because people ask you to. What a shame :-(
    >
    > Although it sure can be annoying, aren't you proud of each new release ?
    > Usually, kernel integrators are proud of their new kernels when they get
    > something rock solid ! People like Con Kolivas, J.A.Magallon, Marc-Christian
    > Pettersen are often proud to announce us the few bits they changed in their
    > tree and which stabilized it. It seems you only do this as an obligation,
    > which is sad, really.

    What I said is that if people think I'm not maintaining 2.4.x (quoting
    Davem, "I really think 2.4.x development is becoming almost non-existent
    lately.) in a acceptable way, the work should be done by someone else. I
    WANT to keep maintaining 2.4, but only if people are happy with that. Do
    you understand ?

    > I understand that maintaining the stable tree, the one which MUST NOT FAIL,
    > may be frustrating, not being as excitant as playing with kernels which try
    > to get the most of every piece of hardware, as others do (although nobody
    > prevents you from developing your own Wolk). But you don't seem to share much
    > about your feelings, ideas or doubts with others. Alan, for example, exchanges
    > a lot with people testing his kernels, suggesting a few tweaks to help them
    > workaround their problems, and integrating the tweak in the next release if it
    > succeeds. This fast feedback allows him to release more often. It also makes
    > his work more intersting for others.

    > People often prefer "here is -rcxx-acxx, which my EPIA now fully
    > supports" to "here is -rcxx, please test it extensively".

    I dont understand what you mean.

    >
    > Perhaps you don't feel assurance when you have to blindly integrate hundreds
    > of patches from people you don't always trust, and that may explain why you
    > suddenly announce a new pre-release and keep silent, hoping for patch authors
    > to reply to questions if any ? If this is the case, jump into the train,
    > there's no risk, except of being caught by Rik's troll-o-meter, or having Viro
    > or hch insult you ! And then ? What's the matter ? Every one has his turn. I
    > even risk it with this OT mail. When you started with 2.4.16, you said that you
    > were afraid you lacked some skills, but you proved to be very capable, because
    > the kernel has moved since, and 2.4.21 should be far more stable than 2.4.16 !
    >
    > This mail is not intended to give you any lesson, but to give a feedback from
    > a Linux 2.4 user who, as many others, feels more and more forgotten by his
    > maintainer. Unfortunately, what David wrote is what many people currently think
    > of 2.4 :-( You threatened to give up, but that would be bad for your image
    > and for Linux.
    >
    > Giving up means no maintainer for a certain amount of time, then
    > a self-proclamed new maintainer (or worse, several ones with a tree fork).
    > Being replaced is cleaner, since you do the job until the new maintainer is
    > ready to start.
    >
    > If you don't have enough time to do everything, send a source quench, or apply
    > one of David's proposed solutions : ask for some help so that only subsystems
    > maintainers feed you as some already do (eg: David, Jeff, Greg), or ask for a
    > pure replacement. If you're bored, that I could understand, because having to
    > deal with arrogant and sometimes even selfish users is not always pleasant,
    > ask for a replacement. If you're fed up with patches that you don't understand,
    > reject them LOUDLY asking for more documentation. And if you plan to have a
    > rest for two weeks, say it, so that people don't send you patches that will be
    > lost in a full mailbox at your return. Yes, this may be what Linus did before
    > you, when people already complained. But there should be a middle line between
    > how he managed his kernel and how you manage it, and BTW, Linus clearly stated
    > that maintaining 2.4 bored him.
    >
    > I've just read your mail about -rc[45]. I'm happy we start to see the light at
    > the end of the 2.4.21 tunnel. As others people, I'm now impatient to both 2.4.21
    > and 2.4.22-pre1. BTW, as discussed perhaps a year or two ago, you could have a
    > preview of 2.4.22-pre1 in parallel with 2.4.21-rc, to feed the impatients,
    > although that may be double work, which you don't necessarily need at the
    > moment.
    >
    > And remember, please communicate, communicate, communicate. You and only you
    > know what problem you have at a given time. If you don't communicate, people
    > always imagine the worst.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Willy
    >
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35    [W:0.028 / U:1.144 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site