Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:59:32 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.) |
| |
On Út 21-02-06 06:44:34, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > Hi. > > On Tuesday 21 February 2006 06:08, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Maybe you feel you are in a power position because your code happened > > > to enter the kernel first, so you few you can have veto power over all > > > other contenders. It sometimes works that way, but only up to a > > > > Unfortunately, I do not need to veto suspend2. It is so complex that > > it vetoes itself. Last time akpm stopped it, IIRC. > > I'm going to let most of the last 8 hours' emails float by without reply, but > think I should comment here.
Thanks.
> I don't believe I've ever seen an email from Andrew stopping a merge, and I > shouldn't have, because I've never asked him to merge it. Being the > perfectionist that I am, I've sought to get it as stable, reliable and > comment-clean as I reasonably could before merging.
I believe I seen reply to that effect (saying "it is working and fast is not enough for merge", or something like that.
Anyway, please Cc me on merge attempts... Pavel -- Web maintainer for suspend.sf.net (www.sf.net/projects/suspend) wanted... - 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/
| |