It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature
manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't
bother to talk to them about it, I'll just flame them and try to undermine
their work." is not acceptable. It would have been nice if you'd actually
tried to work this out instead of handling it this way.
Regards,
AJ Lewis
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 07:51:52PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> Hi
>
> I would like to announce the creation of the openlvm mailing list for
> discussion about maintenance and further development of the Linux
> Logical Volume Manager (LVM).
>
> The new mailing list is named linux-openlvm and hosted at
> nl.linux.org, you can subscribe to the list by posting to
> [email protected] and postings should go to
> [email protected]. The list is unmoderated and open to
> postings from individuals who are not subscribed to the list as it is
> good practice for all open development lists.
>
> We have found it necessary to create the new list as the current LVM
> development proces is closed and does not take input from the
> community. We have experienced numerous incidents of postings to the
> old mailing list with patches, on topic questions and comments about
> the LVM code that have been rejected by the list moderator. We find
> this completely unacceptable just as it is hindering development that
> a development mailing list is being so mismoderated.
>
> Please welcome the new list and join in on the development and
> discussions.
>
> Sincerly,
> Jens Axboe
> Arjan van de Ven
> Martin Petersen
> Rik van Riel
> Jes Sorensen
> -
> Linux-openlvm: open list for LVM on Linux
> Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-openlvm/
>
--
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: [email protected]
http://www.sistina.com
Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
(Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)
-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
Error: Keyboard not attached. Press F1 to continue.
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------
AJ Lewis wrote:
> It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature
> manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't
> bother to talk to them about it, I'll just flame them and try to undermine
> their work." is not acceptable. It would have been nice if you'd actually
> tried to work this out instead of handling it this way.
Maybe he did, but his attempt got moderated down... :)
--
Jeff Garzik | "The universe is like a safe to which there is a
Building 1024 | combination -- but the combination is locked up
MandrakeSoft | in the safe." -- Peter DeVries
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, AJ Lewis wrote:
> It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature
> manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't
> bother to talk to them about it, I'll just flame them and try to undermine
> their work." is not acceptable. It would have been nice if you'd actually
> tried to work this out instead of handling it this way.
We tried, but the last time we had something to say about your
code the message wasn't allowed on your list.
Now that the code is in the kernel, we are of the opinion that
it is no longer acceptable to censor messages when they are too
critical about the LVM source code. This beast is in the kernel,
now we'd better be allowed to talk about the source code and
maintain the thing.
regards,
Rik
--
Linux MM bugzilla: http://linux-mm.org/bugzilla.shtml
Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...
http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
On Thu, Apr 19 2001, AJ Lewis wrote:
> It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature
> manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't
> bother to talk to them about it, I'll just flame them and try to undermine
> their work." is not acceptable. It would have been nice if you'd actually
> tried to work this out instead of handling it this way.
LVM concerns us all now that it is not just an addon, but actually a
part of the kernel. Rejecting mails and reports from users and
developers who just might be able to lend you a hand fixing bugs, is not
just counter productive it's downright rude!
Besides, I didn't think the posting was flame material at all. If
nothing else, it's a wake up call.
--
Jens Axboe
> It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature
> manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't
> bother to talk to them about it, I'll just flame them and try to undermine
> their work." is not acceptable. It would have been nice if you'd actually
> tried to work this out instead of handling it this way.
Well their approach to patches that fix bugs is to reject emails. They've done
that to stuff I've reported any many others. So there is a problem. And its
kind of hard to discuss a problem when you are being moderated out of existance.
The openlvm list is open to existing LVM hackers too..
>>>>> ">" == AJ Lewis <[email protected]> writes:
>> It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more
>> mature manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing
>> something. I won't bother to talk to them about it, I'll just
>> flame them and try to undermine their work." is not acceptable. It
>> would have been nice if you'd actually tried to work this out
>> instead of handling it this way.
This was tried, trust me. We didn't create this list because someone
forgot to respond to a single posting. As we wrote in the announcement
there has been too many incidents: At least two people got kicked off
the old lvm list for posting comments about the latest release using
lower bits in pointers to store data. Other people have posted patches
for serious bugs like NULL pointer dereferences and the postings were
denied. Another person complained about the behavior and got no
response.
For modules included in the Linux kernel, an open development forum is
a minimum requirement.
Jes
>>>>> "AJ" == AJ Lewis <[email protected]> writes:
AJ> It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more
AJ> mature manner.
Personally, I find it exceedingly immature that my postings get
moderated to the bitbucket every time I report a bug in your code.
This is simply not the way we are working in the Linux community, and
you guys will either have to change your closed development model or
deal with a fork of the LVM tree...
--
Martin K. Petersen, Principal Linux Consultant, Linuxcare, Inc.
[email protected], http://www.linuxcare.com/
SGI XFS for Linux Developer, http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:02:50PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Well their approach to patches that fix bugs is to reject emails. They've done
> that to stuff I've reported any many others. So there is a problem. And its
> kind of hard to discuss a problem when you are being moderated out of existance.
Hmm...i guess there is a communication issue here. It sounds like the
message that our ML server was sending was misleading. We were not
rejecting mail because of content. The ML server was rejecting it because
the address was not subscribed. Our idea was that we don't want spam.
If it's completely unmoderated, then we will get a *lot* of spam.
Did anyone bother to e-mail the list admins? Perhaps it was too difficult
to figure out who to mail about this, but I know for a fact that Rik van
Riel and Jens Axboe could post to [email protected]. It would have been
nice if they had mentioned something to us.
> The openlvm list is open to existing LVM hackers too..
True, but it seems silly to duplicate the load if it's not necessary.
Regards,
--
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: [email protected]
http://www.sistina.com
Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
(Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)
-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
Sometimes I have a difficult time handling myself in social situations.
I just start scampering around neurotically, frantically jumping all
over guests. I think it all goes back to when I was raised in the wild
by miniature schnauzers.
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:17:29PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> This was tried, trust me. We didn't create this list because someone
> forgot to respond to a single posting. As we wrote in the announcement
> there has been too many incidents: At least two people got kicked off
> the old lvm list for posting comments about the latest release using
> lower bits in pointers to store data. Other people have posted patches
> for serious bugs like NULL pointer dereferences and the postings were
> denied. Another person complained about the behavior and got no
> response.
What are you talking about??? Got kicked off? If so, it was not
intentional, I can assure you. That would just be stupid. As far as
patches being rejected, refer to the e-mail I just sent.
> For modules included in the Linux kernel, an open development forum is
> a minimum requirement.
Who asked for this? Who did you talk to? I haven't seen anything to this
effect for months.
--
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: [email protected]
http://www.sistina.com
Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
(Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)
-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
Over and over I find being redundant is key to success
in the art of redundancy - Jay Armstrong
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------
On Thu, Apr 19 2001, AJ Lewis wrote:
> Did anyone bother to e-mail the list admins? Perhaps it was too difficult
> to figure out who to mail about this, but I know for a fact that Rik van
> Riel and Jens Axboe could post to [email protected]. It would have been
> nice if they had mentioned something to us.
First one gets a mail saying that the mail sent is queued for moderator
approval, since I'm not on the list. Then later a second mail arrives,
saying the mail has been rejected by the moderator.
I then reply to the admin mail listed, in not-so-kind words (yes I was
pissed off). Haven't heard anything.
> > The openlvm list is open to existing LVM hackers too..
>
> True, but it seems silly to duplicate the load if it's not necessary.
It's necessary in that we need an open list.
--
Jens Axboe
>>>>> ">" == AJ Lewis <[email protected]> writes:
>> Hmm...i guess there is a communication issue here. It sounds like
>> the message that our ML server was sending was misleading. We were
>> not rejecting mail because of content. The ML server was rejecting
>> it because the address was not subscribed. Our idea was that we
>> don't want spam. If it's completely unmoderated, then we will get
>> a *lot* of spam.
The mail states it's been forwarded to the moderator, yes I just got
one. Thats another issue here, Cc'ing a closed mailing list when
posting to an open list like linux-kernel is rude (but thats just a
minor issue in this discussion).
>> Did anyone bother to e-mail the list admins? Perhaps it was too
>> difficult to figure out who to mail about this, but I know for a
>> fact that Rik van Riel and Jens Axboe could post to
>> [email protected]. It would have been nice if they had
>> mentioned something to us.
I know that Jens posted to linux-lvm-admin two days ago and didn't get
a response.
>> The openlvm list is open to existing LVM hackers too..
>> True, but it seems silly to duplicate the load if it's not
>> necessary.
Right now there is no load because the postings aren't getting
through at all.
Jes
The list is now open. I've talked to our admin and he's opening it up.
Send me e-mail if it doesn't work, 'cause something else is broken.
All it would have taken was a request and a good reason for doing so, but
I guess this is one way to do it. Just don't complain about spam. :)
Regards,
AJ Lewis
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:29:27PM -0500, AJ Lewis wrote:
> It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature
> manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't
> bother to talk to them about it, I'll just flame them and try to undermine
> their work." is not acceptable. It would have been nice if you'd actually
> tried to work this out instead of handling it this way.
>
> Regards,
> AJ Lewis
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 07:51:52PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I would like to announce the creation of the openlvm mailing list for
> > discussion about maintenance and further development of the Linux
> > Logical Volume Manager (LVM).
> >
> > The new mailing list is named linux-openlvm and hosted at
> > nl.linux.org, you can subscribe to the list by posting to
> > [email protected] and postings should go to
> > [email protected]. The list is unmoderated and open to
> > postings from individuals who are not subscribed to the list as it is
> > good practice for all open development lists.
> >
> > We have found it necessary to create the new list as the current LVM
> > development proces is closed and does not take input from the
> > community. We have experienced numerous incidents of postings to the
> > old mailing list with patches, on topic questions and comments about
> > the LVM code that have been rejected by the list moderator. We find
> > this completely unacceptable just as it is hindering development that
> > a development mailing list is being so mismoderated.
> >
> > Please welcome the new list and join in on the development and
> > discussions.
> >
> > Sincerly,
> > Jens Axboe
> > Arjan van de Ven
> > Martin Petersen
> > Rik van Riel
> > Jes Sorensen
> > -
> > Linux-openlvm: open list for LVM on Linux
> > Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-openlvm/
> >
>
>
> --
> AJ Lewis
> Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951
> 1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952
> Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: [email protected]
> http://www.sistina.com
>
> Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
> Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
> (Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)
>
> -----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
> Error: Keyboard not attached. Press F1 to continue.
> -----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------
--
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: [email protected]
http://www.sistina.com
Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
(Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)
-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
Your mouse has moved. Windows NT must be restarted for the change to take
effect. Reboot now? [ OK ]
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------
>>>>> "AJ" == AJ Lewis <[email protected]> writes:
AJ> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:17:29PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> This was tried, trust me. We didn't create this list because
>> someone forgot to respond to a single posting. As we wrote in the
>> announcement there has been too many incidents: At least two people
>> got kicked off the old lvm list for posting comments about the
>> latest release using lower bits in pointers to store data. Other
>> people have posted patches for serious bugs like NULL pointer
>> dereferences and the postings were denied. Another person
>> complained about the behavior and got no response.
AJ> What are you talking about??? Got kicked off? If so, it was not
AJ> intentional, I can assure you. That would just be stupid. As far
AJ> as patches being rejected, refer to the e-mail I just sent.
[email protected] got unsubscribed when he posted the complaint about
storing data in lower bits of pointers. Riel got bumped when he
followed up on the same topic.
Jens just told me he has at least one denied reponse from the
moderator (just got the below from him):
"Your request to the linux-lvm mailing list
Posting of your message titled "Re: 2.4.3-ac{6,7} LVM hang"
has been rejected by the list moderator."
>> For modules included in the Linux kernel, an open development forum
>> is a minimum requirement.
AJ> Who asked for this? Who did you talk to? I haven't seen anything
AJ> to this effect for months.
A moderated list is not an open environment. Had this been for a
Sistina only product I wouldn't have any problem with it, but this is
for an integrated part of the Linux kernel.
Jes
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:35:51PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> >>>>> ">" == AJ Lewis <[email protected]> writes:
> >> Hmm...i guess there is a communication issue here. It sounds like
> >> the message that our ML server was sending was misleading. We were
> >> not rejecting mail because of content. The ML server was rejecting
> >> it because the address was not subscribed. Our idea was that we
> >> don't want spam. If it's completely unmoderated, then we will get
> >> a *lot* of spam.
>
> The mail states it's been forwarded to the moderator, yes I just got
> one. Thats another issue here, Cc'ing a closed mailing list when
> posting to an open list like linux-kernel is rude (but thats just a
> minor issue in this discussion).
The list is open now. Sorry for the inconvenience and misunderstanding.
Hopefully this is a non-issue now.
> >> Did anyone bother to e-mail the list admins? Perhaps it was too
> >> difficult to figure out who to mail about this, but I know for a
> >> fact that Rik van Riel and Jens Axboe could post to
> >> [email protected]. It would have been nice if they had
> >> mentioned something to us.
>
> I know that Jens posted to linux-lvm-admin two days ago and didn't get
> a response.
Hmm...our admin was testing LVM + GFS on his laptop on linux 2.4 and lost
some mail due to file corruption a couple of days ago...that's probably what
happened to it. :(
Regards,
--
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: [email protected]
http://www.sistina.com
Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
(Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)
-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life.
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------
AJ Lewis writes:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:02:50PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Well their approach to patches that fix bugs is to reject emails. They've
> > done that to stuff I've reported any many others. So there is a problem.
> > And it's kind of hard to discuss a problem when you are being moderated
> > out of existance.
Not to be negative, but isn't Alan the pot calling the kettle black? You
use ORBS to block email as well, with no hope of reprieve. AFAIK, the
linux-lvm list has a moderator which _should_ forward legitimate emails
on to the list. Maybe they are piling up somewhere, unread?
> Hmm...i guess there is a communication issue here. It sounds like the
> message that our ML server was sending was misleading. We were not
> rejecting mail because of content. The ML server was rejecting it because
> the address was not subscribed. Our idea was that we don't want spam.
> If it's completely unmoderated, then we will get a *lot* of spam.
I don't think that the subscription is necessarily the only issue. I'm
subscribed to all of the LVM mailing lists, and still a lot of what I
submit (legitimate bug fixes, and not just features/code cleanup) does
not get added to CVS. Yes, the no-possible-harm patches like man pages
went in, but not other stuff. Also, it doesn't appear that any of the
LVM changes are making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a
recepie for disaster.
Basically, I'm at the point where trying to create clean patches from my
LVM source tree to apply to CVS is so much work it is hardly worth it.
I'm seriously looking at devoting the time I used to spend on LVM to the
EVMS project instead. They (appear to) have in-kernel LVM support working
already, so no user tools needed for VG/LV activation. Granted, they don't
yet have tools to create/modify VG/LVs, but I think I can help them there.
It appears more likely that EVMS will only support Linux LVM volumes for
compatibility, and move to a more robust on-disk format for metadata.
The openlvm list may change my mind, I'll see.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
\ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert
> All it would have taken was a request and a good reason for doing so, but
> I guess this is one way to do it. Just don't complain about spam. :)
I think you'll find several folks who run linux-kernel and other lists like
the linux.nl mailhub more than happy to help there
Alan
>>>>> "Jens" == Jens Axboe <[email protected]> writes:
Jens> First one gets a mail saying that the mail sent is queued for
Jens> moderator approval, since I'm not on the list. Then later a
Jens> second mail arrives, saying the mail has been rejected by the
Jens> moderator.
Yep. Same here. Latest and greatest...
---8<---
From: [email protected]
Subject: Your message to linux-lvm awaits moderator approval
To: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 22:02:40 +0200
Your mail to 'linux-lvm' with the subject
Re: [linux-lvm] *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 Beta 7 available at
http://www.sistina.com
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
---8<---
Now, I held my breath until the following day...
---8<---
From: [email protected]
Subject: Request to mailing list linux-lvm rejected
To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:32:36 +0200
Your request to the linux-lvm mailing list
Posting of your message titled "Re: [linux-lvm] *** ANNOUNCEMENT
*** LVM 0.9.1 Beta 7 available at http://www.sistina.com"
has been rejected by the list moderator. The moderator gave the
following reason for rejecting your request:
"Non-members are not allowed to post messages to this list."
---8<---
Since there is such a long delay between the two mails, it's obvious
that there is human intervention involved. And when an on-topic mail
is rejected by the moderator, well... go figure.
And this isn't the first time this has happened to me and several
others. By far...
--
Martin K. Petersen, Principal Linux Consultant, Linuxcare, Inc.
[email protected], http://www.linuxcare.com/
SGI XFS for Linux Developer, http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/
> Not to be negative, but isn't Alan the pot calling the kettle black? You
> use ORBS to block email as well, with no hope of reprieve. AFAIK, the
I dont stop other people discussing the kernel. Its very very different.
> linux-lvm list has a moderator which _should_ forward legitimate emails
> on to the list. Maybe they are piling up somewhere, unread?
If they were that would be understandable but they were being rejected. Anyway
it seems to be a finished discussion.
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> I don't think that the subscription is necessarily the only
> issue. I'm subscribed to all of the LVM mailing lists, and
> still a lot of what I submit (legitimate bug fixes, and not just
> features/code cleanup) does not get added to CVS. Yes, the
> no-possible-harm patches like man pages went in, but not other
> stuff. Also, it doesn't appear that any of the LVM changes are
> making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a recepie
> for disaster.
This is indeed an even bigger problem. LVM is no longer just
a Sistina product, it is an integrated part of the Linux kernel.
This brings with it the responsability of maintaining the LVM
subsystem which is included in the kernel. I understand that
Sistina may want to do "LVM releases" every once in a while,
but this isn't a development model that makes much sense when
their code has been integrated into the Linux kernel (IMHO).
> The openlvm list may change my mind, I'll see.
If you think any other openly accessible LVM development things
are needed (maybe a CVS tree which can be used by all LVM
developers and not just the Sistina folks?) .. NL.linux.org is
all yours.
regards,
Rik
--
Linux MM bugzilla: http://linux-mm.org/bugzilla.shtml
Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...
http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:45:20PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> I don't think that the subscription is necessarily the only issue. I'm
> subscribed to all of the LVM mailing lists, and still a lot of what I
> submit (legitimate bug fixes, and not just features/code cleanup) does
> not get added to CVS. Yes, the no-possible-harm patches like man pages
> went in, but not other stuff. Also, it doesn't appear that any of the
> LVM changes are making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a
> recepie for disaster.
Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment. It
would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
review. Linus does the exact same thing. I've said this before to you
Andreas, but apparently you feel that you should have final say on whether
your patches go in or not.
As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in. Maybe
someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
> Basically, I'm at the point where trying to create clean patches from my
> LVM source tree to apply to CVS is so much work it is hardly worth it.
> I'm seriously looking at devoting the time I used to spend on LVM to the
> EVMS project instead. They (appear to) have in-kernel LVM support working
> already, so no user tools needed for VG/LV activation. Granted, they don't
> yet have tools to create/modify VG/LVs, but I think I can help them there.
> It appears more likely that EVMS will only support Linux LVM volumes for
> compatibility, and move to a more robust on-disk format for metadata.
>
> The openlvm list may change my mind, I'll see.
>
> Cheers, Andreas
> --
> Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
> \ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
> http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
--
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: [email protected]
http://www.sistina.com
Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
(Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)
-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
Carpe Aptenodytes! (Seize the Penguins!)
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:45:20PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> I don't think that the subscription is necessarily the only issue. I'm
> subscribed to all of the LVM mailing lists, and still a lot of what I
> submit (legitimate bug fixes, and not just features/code cleanup) does
> not get added to CVS.
Just alone the fact that you as number one submitter of LVM-bugfixes since
at least 0.8 do not get CVS write access is a sign of closedness for me.
But we discussed that on the sistina list.
> Yes, the no-possible-harm patches like man pages
> went in, but not other stuff. Also, it doesn't appear that any of the
> LVM changes are making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a
> recepie for disaster.
100% True. A few days ago I looke at the LVM patches to see what parts
of it could be fed to Linus in small pieces - but it's such a _huge_
mixture of bugfixes, cleanups and move-arounds that it looks pretty
much impossible.
> Basically, I'm at the point where trying to create clean patches from my
> LVM source tree to apply to CVS is so much work it is hardly worth it.
IMHO wou should just put _your_ tree on a sever and submit it (in pieces)
to Linus. AFAIK all serious users of LVM have used you're patched versions.
Maybe openlvm is a good hood for such a project?
> I'm seriously looking at devoting the time I used to spend on LVM to the
> EVMS project instead. They (appear to) have in-kernel LVM support working
> already, so no user tools needed for VG/LV activation. Granted, they don't
> yet have tools to create/modify VG/LVs, but I think I can help them there.
Yes - when looking at what code they produces it looks a _lot_ cleaner than
Linux-LVM and while the papers had serious signs of Overengeering the
actual code looks very good to me - it could just get a little better
integrated with the main kernel, but that's a 2.5 issue.
Christoph
--
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.
On Thu, Apr 19 2001, AJ Lewis wrote:
> As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in. Maybe
> someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
The diff between 2.4.4-pre LVM and your last beta is HUGE. That's a very
good clue why Linus hasn't taken it! Find a bug, fix it, submit diff.
Not find lots of bugs for a month, submit huge diff.
--
Jens Axboe
> As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in. Maybe
> someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
Has it occured to you that some of this might be because the code does stuff
like hide flags in the low bits of addresses and do unchecked kmallocs ?
Things people have tried to send patches for ..
The best way to get stuff to Linus is to feed him changes one at a time and
make them all clean and clearly correct. When I have a big set of changes I
normally start by feeding Linus all the 'fluff' - spelling checks and small
warning fixes. After that its normally easy to pick out changes one at a time
and feed them on.
Given 500 lines of mixed up diff it is very hard to verify the correctness of
anything.
Alan
AJ Lewis wrote:
> Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment. It
> would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
> review. Linus does the exact same thing. I've said this before to you
> Andreas, but apparently you feel that you should have final say on whether
> your patches go in or not.
> As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in. Maybe
> someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
Read Documentation/SubmittingPatches, and also listen to kernel hackers
who know the block layer and want to fix lvm.
And I wonder, if kernel hackers are saying lvm is broken... why do you
want to freeze it and ship it in that state?
--
Jeff Garzik | "The universe is like a safe to which there is a
Building 1024 | combination -- but the combination is locked up
MandrakeSoft | in the safe." -- Peter DeVries
AJ Lewis wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:02:50PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>
>>Well their approach to patches that fix bugs is to reject emails. They've done
>>that to stuff I've reported any many others. So there is a problem. And its
>>kind of hard to discuss a problem when you are being moderated out of existance.
>>
>
> Hmm...i guess there is a communication issue here. It sounds like the
> message that our ML server was sending was misleading. We were not
> rejecting mail because of content. The ML server was rejecting it because
> the address was not subscribed. Our idea was that we don't want spam.
> If it's completely unmoderated, then we will get a *lot* of spam.
Gosh, this seems like a bit of a red herring, IMHO. Do you think the
LKML gets a "lot" of spam? Or, how about the linux-usb-devel or
linux-hotplug-devel lists? None of these lists are moderated and the
occasional spam gets sent to them, but I haven't noticed there being
enough spam to hinder the usefulness of these lists.
Miles
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 04:09:32PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> AJ Lewis wrote:
> > Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> > that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment. It
> > would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
> > review. Linus does the exact same thing. I've said this before to you
> > Andreas, but apparently you feel that you should have final say on whether
> > your patches go in or not.
>
> > As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> > to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in. Maybe
> > someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
>
> Read Documentation/SubmittingPatches, and also listen to kernel hackers
> who know the block layer and want to fix lvm.
>
> And I wonder, if kernel hackers are saying lvm is broken... why do you
> want to freeze it and ship it in that state?
Hmm...perhaps I didn't make myself clear. AFAIK Heinz is not putting
cosmetic changes into the CVS. The team should be putting fixes in. If
they aren't it's because they are dealing with backlog.
As far as the smaller patches go. I know. We're working on it; really we
are.
Regards,
--
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: [email protected]
http://www.sistina.com
Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
(Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)
-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
There's nary an animal alive that can outrun a greased Scotsman.
- Groundskeeper Willie
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------
Hi AJ,
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 02:40:15PM -0500, AJ Lewis wrote:
> The list is now open. I've talked to our admin and he's opening it up.
> Send me e-mail if it doesn't work, 'cause something else is broken.
to me it looks like your reactions are too late.
I suggest you Sistina people accept the fact the there is an open list
(better) managed by somebody else now and you all move there and use this as
a forum for your discussions from now on. Just send the new list admin a
list with your people to be subscribed ... and I can not imagine they will
refuse to help you. (Otherwise they would be as closed-minded as you were.)
Maintaining a project which got integrated into the kernel and forms a
critical part of it (if there are bugs) is not an easy thing to do, and you
should expect controversary discussions. On the one hand you want to fix
things and introduce small and large improvements, on the other hand you
don't want to take risks. Just get used to it.
You'll always have a newer version to test than the one in the kernel.
However, it works best if you try to submit your changes as often as
possible. Of course I know, this is close to impossible when you have to
redesign stuff and have to wait for stabilization ...
Good luck!
--
Kurt Garloff <[email protected]> Eindhoven, NL
GPG key: See mail header, key servers Linux kernel development
SuSE GmbH, Nuernberg, FRG SCSI, Security
Alan Cox wrote:
>>As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
>>to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in. Maybe
>>someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
>>
>
> Has it occured to you that some of this might be because the code does stuff
> like hide flags in the low bits of addresses and do unchecked kmallocs ?
> Things people have tried to send patches for ..
>
> The best way to get stuff to Linus is to feed him changes one at a time and
> make them all clean and clearly correct. When I have a big set of changes I
> normally start by feeding Linus all the 'fluff' - spelling checks and small
> warning fixes. After that its normally easy to pick out changes one at a time
> and feed them on.
>
> Given 500 lines of mixed up diff it is very hard to verify the correctness of
> anything.
The IrDA folks have had a similar struggle. AJ, perhaps it would be
helpful for you to read the discussion that took place regarding getting
a bunch of IrDA code merged into the 2.4 tree:
http://www.pasta.cs.uit.no/pipermail/linux-irda/2000-November/001923.html
Dag Brattli <[email protected]> eventually had a discussion with Linus and
hashed out what he needed to do to get Linus to accept his big patch.
It all
worked out very well, IIRC.
Miles
AJ writes:
> Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment.
Actually, the whole idea of "trying to get a release out" is part of the
problem. If patches were included into CVS and sent sent to Linus as they
arrived we wouldn't be in this situation. My take on this is that holding
back legitimate patches "to get the release out" ends up accumulating so
many changes that it is impossible to sync up later. The Linux kernel is a
successful project because Linus generally accepts everything that is a
bug fix or code cleanup (features are another matter, but very little if
any of the patches I send you are "features").
> It would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
> review. Linus does the exact same thing.
Yes, it would be stupid to "just accept everything" that is sent to the
mailing list, but really, I've done a pretty good job of submitting patches
in small, self-contained pieces IMHO (even if it happens that I send a lot
of such patches at one time). I mean the code has to be cleaned up at some
time, so we may as well do it sooner rather than later.
> I've said this before to you Andreas, but apparently you feel that you
> should have final say on whether your patches go in or not.
Well, I would hope that given the fact I've been working on LVM considerably
longer than anyone else at Sistina (excluding Heinz) that you might just
trust my judgement a bit more. I'm _trying_ to contribute to LVM, and do
so in easy-to-digest pieces, but given that it is hard to get patches into
CVS, and my codebase is increasingly divergent from your CVS tree.
I have better ways to spend my time than going through 10,000 lines of
diff and guessing which parts are new, and which parts have been held of
"for the next release". The EVMS code is starting out clean, and I hope
I can help keep it that way.
> As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in. Maybe
> someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
That's because the "release" patches are too huge now. If it were up to me,
and I've asked you a couple of times on this, I would have already sent a
whole bunch of bug fixes to Linus as small, self-contained patches. However,
I held back because you asked me not to send patches to Linus directly.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
\ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> went in, but not other stuff. Also, it doesn't appear that any of the
> LVM changes are making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a
> recepie for disaster.
agreed... after the problematic inclusion of 0.9 into the kernel i
asked on sistina LVM list whether they could try to be a bit more
proactive about feeding patches on to linus, to make life easier for
LVM users - they had fixes for the problems of 0.9 but never, and
still to this day have not, fed the code on.
Still to this day, nothing from them but announcements on l-k of
various betas. AFAIK all the patches for LVM submitted to linus since
0.8 went in have been from core linux developers (Andrea, Jens,
etc.), not sistina.
shame... their LVM is really nice to use. Just frustrating that they
do want to feed the code on... more frustrating still when you
consider the lobbying that went on to try persuade l-k that LVM
should go in.
> Cheers, Andreas
obHiddenCode: lm-sensors... used to use this a long time ago.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma [email protected] [email protected]
PGP5 key: http://www.clubi.ie/jakma/publickey.txt
-------------------------------------------
Fortune:
Happiness is twin floppies.
Dear Sistina:
I know very little about LVM, but from watching earlier projects
in the same situation you're in now, the path you need to follow
seems clear:
Stop using CVS internally for development.
It makes checking in changes without submitting them to
Linus too easy.
To get sync'd back up, *start with the standard kernel*,
and start generating clean, human-understandable patches one
at a time that bring it up to where you want.
Once you've achieved that, have your programmers generate patches
rather than checking in to CVS, and feed the patches to Linus
at the same time you hand them out to your other programmers.
Individual programmers may need to do more testing this way, but
c'est la vie.
This is the only way to achieve union with the standard kernel.
So many projects have failed to learn this lesson...
ignore it at your peril.
- Dan
> Hmm...i guess there is a communication issue here. It sounds like the
> message that our ML server was sending was misleading. We were not
> rejecting mail because of content. The ML server was rejecting it
because
> the address was not subscribed. Our idea was that we don't want spam.
> If it's completely unmoderated, then we will get a *lot* of spam.
I do not think there is a miscommunication here. First, someone gets an
e-mail saying that your message "waits for moderator's approval". Then
you get a message saying that your "message was rejected by the
moderator because you are not subscribed to the list".
Mind it, those were bug reports, not spam. I took your beta code, tested
it, saw real bugs and problems and wrote bug reports BECAUSE YOU
INCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DO SO AND GIVE THOSE EMAILS IN THE DOCUMENTATION!!!
There is no place in the source tree docs that say the list is
moderated. It it had said so, I would have not wasted my time. I felt
really pissed off for waisting my time. BTW, other e-mails given in the
documentation just bounce. If you do not want people sending bug
reports, update your documentation. It is not polite to make people
waste their time!
--
----------------------------------------
Constantine Gavrilov
Linux Leader
Optibase Ltd
7 Shenkar St, Herzliya 46120, Israel
Phone: (972-9)-970-9140
Fax: (972-9)-958-6099
----------------------------------------
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 04:09:32PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> AJ Lewis wrote:
> > Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> > that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment. It
> > would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
> > review. Linus does the exact same thing. I've said this before to you
> > Andreas, but apparently you feel that you should have final say on whether
> > your patches go in or not.
>
> > As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
> > to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in. Maybe
> > someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
>
> Read Documentation/SubmittingPatches, and also listen to kernel hackers
> who know the block layer and want to fix lvm.
OK, we're in the process of splitting the big patch up into nice clean small
patches to go to Linus. Hopefully this should be done today, or very shortly at
least.
patrick
Miles Lane <[email protected]> writes:
> Gosh, this seems like a bit of a red herring, IMHO. Do you think the
> LKML gets a "lot" of spam? Or, how about the linux-usb-devel or
> linux-hotplug-devel lists? None of these lists are moderated and the
> occasional spam gets sent to them, but I haven't noticed there being
> enough spam to hinder the usefulness of these lists.
That's partly because davem and Matti are rabid anti-spam weasels and
very good at it. ;) There are all kinds of filters (including
content-based ones) on l-k, otherwise we'd be inundated in processed
pork...
-Doug
--
The rain man gave me two cures; he said jump right in,
The first was Texas medicine--the second was just railroad gin,
And like a fool I mixed them, and it strangled up my mind,
Now people just get uglier, and I got no sense of time... --Dylan
Having just a couple of days of vacation I got informed today that
a number of people got pissed off and decided to open a new Linux LVM mailing
list <[email protected]>.
Facts people complained about included:
1. people got dropped from the list
2. messages bouncing
3. lack of (small) LVM patches to the Linux kernel
4. submitted patches being ignored
WRT points 1 and 2:
-------------------
our Linux LVM mailing list <[email protected]> is now completely open
in order to avoid such kind of problems in the future.
We apologize for any kind of trouble this caused in the past!
We kindly ask everybody to stay at <[email protected]> or to join it
in order to avoid a mailing list split.
Thanks a lot!
WRT point 3:
------------
we will regard the Linus kernel as *the* repository for LVM driver changes
rather than our public CVS repository from now on!
In order to ease this migration we are working to create a bunch of small
patches to submit them to the comunity.
We will announce when they are available ASAP and would appreciate if
people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Andreas Dilger
could check them *before* we start submitting them to Linus.
Thanks a lot in advance for your support.
WRT point 4:
------------
a lot of patches send in by the comunity have been included
in the actual LVM source.
We appreciate all your valuable related work!
Nevertheless about 30 patches which would have changed too much have been
postponed for LVM 1.1 *because* we are in a feature freeze since a couple
of weeks heading to a production stable LVM 1.0.
The submitters have been informed about this fact.
We will make these postponed patches accessable to everybody and will
discuss the status of future patches in the public on the list from now on
in order to avoid any further lack of information here.
None of the patches which showed up on the lvm mailing lists
have been discarded without notice!
General statement:
------------------
Linux LVM is a Sistina GPL project and there's no danger at all
that we want to change its GPL nature!
We apologize for any inconveniences and kindly ask everybody to continue to
help us making a better Linux LVM.
--
Regards,
Heinz -- The LVM Guy --
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Heinz Mauelshagen Sistina Software Inc.
Senior Consultant/Developer Am Sonnenhang 11
56242 Marienrachdorf
Germany
[email protected] +49 2626 141200
FAX 924446
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> We will announce when they are available ASAP and would appreciate if
> people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Andreas Dilger
> could check them *before* we start submitting them to Linus.
I'll be glad to help look over them.
On Fri, Apr 20 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > We will announce when they are available ASAP and would appreciate if
> > people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Andreas Dilger
> > could check them *before* we start submitting them to Linus.
>
> I'll be glad to help look over them.
Same here, the important thing is that we actually get this patch flow
going. And hopefully in the future as well :)
--
Jens Axboe
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 08:36:37AM -0400, Doug McNaught wrote:
[ not much at all spams at linux-kernel ... ]
>
> That's partly because davem and Matti are rabid anti-spam weasels and
> very good at it. ;) There are all kinds of filters (including
> content-based ones) on l-k, otherwise we'd be inundated in processed
> pork...
>
I would say it is SOLELY because we are quite good at it.
Some insidious small surprises get thru every now and then,
and we really can't block them all without endangering the
freedom of dogfight (in between on-topic things) at the list.
If you are PERL speaker (or can at least comprehend perl's
m(atch) expressions), here is URL to info about it, plus
the actual live running filter-set:
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Go to the end of the page, and you see link for the actual
filter code used at the VGER's Majordomo.
I can only hope that when a legitimate posting goes to list-owner
approval, the list-owner would either approve the thing, or inform
the message originator that they had used tabooed expressions, and
should avoid it in the future to get thru.
(I get a lot of junk, linux-kernel-owner gets A LOT MORE ...)
> -Doug
/Matti Aarnio
On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Matti Aarnio wrote:
> If you are PERL speaker (or can at least comprehend perl's
> m(atch) expressions), here is URL to info about it, plus
> the actual live running filter-set:
>
> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> Go to the end of the page, and you see link for the actual
> filter code used at the VGER's Majordomo.
To get the filter set used by NL.linux.org:
cvs -d :pserver:[email protected]:/home/CVS login
password: cvs
cvs -d :pserver:[email protected]:/home/CVS checkout spamfilter
You can also use the regexps and the script in this CVS tree to
build your own majordomo.cf automatically whenever new regexps
get added.
regards,
Rik
--
Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...
http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 07:04:21PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > We will announce when they are available ASAP and would appreciate if
> > people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Andreas Dilger
> > could check them *before* we start submitting them to Linus.
>
> I'll be glad to help look over them.
Thanks Alan :-)
--
Regards,
Heinz -- The LVM Guy --
*** Software bugs are stupid.
Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them ***
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Heinz Mauelshagen Sistina Software Inc.
Senior Consultant/Developer Am Sonnenhang 11
56242 Marienrachdorf
Germany
[email protected] +49 2626 141200
FAX 924446
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 08:25:15PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > We will announce when they are available ASAP and would appreciate if
> > > people like Alan Cox, Andrea Arcangeli and Andreas Dilger
> > > could check them *before* we start submitting them to Linus.
> >
> > I'll be glad to help look over them.
>
> Same here, the important thing is that we actually get this patch flow
> going. And hopefully in the future as well :)
Thanks and yep.
We learned that leasson now. Hopefully ;-)
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
--
Regards,
Heinz -- The LVM Guy --
*** Software bugs are stupid.
Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them ***
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Heinz Mauelshagen Sistina Software Inc.
Senior Consultant/Developer Am Sonnenhang 11
56242 Marienrachdorf
Germany
[email protected] +49 2626 141200
FAX 924446
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:48:19PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19 2001, AJ Lewis wrote:
> > It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature
> > manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't
> > bother to talk to them about it, I'll just flame them and try to undermine
> > their work." is not acceptable. It would have been nice if you'd actually
> > tried to work this out instead of handling it this way.
>
> LVM concerns us all now that it is not just an addon, but actually a
> part of the kernel.
As I stated before: there's many more people with lots of expertise *now*
and we appreciate that!
> Rejecting mails and reports from users and
> developers who just might be able to lend you a hand fixing bugs, is not
> just counter productive it's downright rude!
As our (former) list maintainer Ben Lutgens stated:
The rejetc answer contained information how to subscribe to the list which
is a seconds deal ;-)
Anyway: all LVM related lists at sistina.com are now completely open!
People already send hints to spam filters; thank you guys!
>
> Besides, I didn't think the posting was flame material at all. If
> nothing else, it's a wake up call.
We take it like this and we take it serious that you got annoyed, no matter
what the actual reason is.
I think the facts that the sistina.com lists are open to everybody
now *and* that we will release policies to allow write access to our
CVS repository for major contributors *and* that we'll have a set of (small)
patches in the next couple of days to get vanilla updated will help a lot.
Thanks for the wake up call ;-) and all your support!
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Regards,
Heinz -- The LVM Guy --
*** Software bugs are stupid.
Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them ***
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Heinz Mauelshagen Sistina Software Inc.
Senior Consultant/Developer Am Sonnenhang 11
56242 Marienrachdorf
Germany
[email protected] +49 2626 141200
FAX 924446
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 03:35:43PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, AJ Lewis wrote:
>
> > It is unfortunate that this could not have been resolved in a more mature
> > manner. Saying "I don't like the way somebody is doing something. I won't
> > bother to talk to them about it, I'll just flame them and try to undermine
> > their work." is not acceptable. It would have been nice if you'd actually
> > tried to work this out instead of handling it this way.
>
> We tried, but the last time we had something to say about your
> code the message wasn't allowed on your list.
As mentioned in other mails multiple times:
The reject answer contained information about how to become a subscriber.
Our list admin just hated spam and now he has pain in the neck ;-)))
The lists at sistina.com are completely open now anyway :)
>
> Now that the code is in the kernel, we are of the opinion that
> it is no longer acceptable to censor messages when they are too
> critical about the LVM source code.
This is completely misleading!
There has *never* been censoring in place!
It was just rejects for mail from non subscribers who actually could subscribe
in a seconds effort.
So please let us stop claiming wrong things here.
Thanks!
> This beast is in the kernel,
> now we'd better be allowed to talk about the source code and
> maintain the thing.
Yes, yes, yes!!!
Thanks for all your future appreciated patch and advice input in advance.
>
> regards,
>
> Rik
> --
> Linux MM bugzilla: http://linux-mm.org/bugzilla.shtml
>
> Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
> However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...
>
> http://www.surriel.com/
> http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Regards,
Heinz -- The LVM Guy --
*** Software bugs are stupid.
Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them ***
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Heinz Mauelshagen Sistina Software Inc.
Senior Consultant/Developer Am Sonnenhang 11
56242 Marienrachdorf
Germany
[email protected] +49 2626 141200
FAX 924446
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Sorry, sorry.
The lists are open.
Please tell us if mailman still bothers.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 03:46:53PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> >>>>> "Jens" == Jens Axboe <[email protected]> writes:
>
> Jens> First one gets a mail saying that the mail sent is queued for
> Jens> moderator approval, since I'm not on the list. Then later a
> Jens> second mail arrives, saying the mail has been rejected by the
> Jens> moderator.
>
> Yep. Same here. Latest and greatest...
>
> ---8<---
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Your message to linux-lvm awaits moderator approval
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 22:02:40 +0200
>
> Your mail to 'linux-lvm' with the subject
>
> Re: [linux-lvm] *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 Beta 7 available at
> http://www.sistina.com
>
> Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
> ---8<---
>
> Now, I held my breath until the following day...
>
> ---8<---
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Request to mailing list linux-lvm rejected
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:32:36 +0200
>
> Your request to the linux-lvm mailing list
>
> Posting of your message titled "Re: [linux-lvm] *** ANNOUNCEMENT
> *** LVM 0.9.1 Beta 7 available at http://www.sistina.com"
>
> has been rejected by the list moderator. The moderator gave the
> following reason for rejecting your request:
>
> "Non-members are not allowed to post messages to this list."
> ---8<---
>
> Since there is such a long delay between the two mails, it's obvious
> that there is human intervention involved. And when an on-topic mail
> is rejected by the moderator, well... go figure.
>
> And this isn't the first time this has happened to me and several
> others. By far...
>
> --
> Martin K. Petersen, Principal Linux Consultant, Linuxcare, Inc.
> [email protected], http://www.linuxcare.com/
> SGI XFS for Linux Developer, http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Regards,
Heinz -- The LVM Guy --
*** Software bugs are stupid.
Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them ***
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Heinz Mauelshagen Sistina Software Inc.
Senior Consultant/Developer Am Sonnenhang 11
56242 Marienrachdorf
Germany
[email protected] +49 2626 141200
FAX 924446
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-