[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
On Sat, May 02, 2009 at 07:30:02PM +1000, wrote:
> The non-technical reasons for this patch are available to anyone who
> cares to read any of the many news sites that discuss recent
> events. The fact that I can't discuss those reasons shouldn't preclude
> me from proposing a technical solution which tries to minimise the
> impact on Linux users.

Yes, the fact that you let someone else send a patch for you, refuse to
state any reason for it and when asked for it talk around the problems
is a very good reason not to bother with a patch.

If you think there is a patent problem with long file names and have
a good argument for it we should just make the reduce functionality
the default until it's settled. If you do not have a good argument
we should drop this completely.

> I'm hoping that you and others will look at the proposed technical
> solution to the non-technical problem, and perhaps suggest better
> approaches. There are a wide variety of approaches to avoiding this
> problem, and we need to work out which, if any, should be part of the
> releases.

Sorting out a problem starts with clearly stating what the problem is.

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-02 14:47    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean