Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 05:19:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 05:19:48 -0500 Received: from mail.ithnet.com ([217.64.64.8]:43526 "HELO heather.ithnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 05:19:47 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:30:35 +0100 From: Stephan von Krawczynski To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: jgarzik@pobox.com, rml@tech9.net, mj@ucw.cz, alan@redhat.com, pavel@ucw.cz, szepe@pinerecords.com, arjanv@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Ptrace hole / Linux 2.2.25 Message-Id: <20030324113035.540cfd25.skraw@ithnet.com> In-Reply-To: <1940000.1048460794@[10.10.2.4]> References: <29100000.1048459104@[10.10.2.4]> <3E7E3AF0.6040107@pobox.com> <1940000.1048460794@[10.10.2.4]> Organization: ith Kommunikationstechnik GmbH X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.11 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2246 Lines: 48 On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 15:06:35 -0800 "Martin J. Bligh" wrote: > > I agree that we are disagreeing about what should be mainline 2.4 :) I guess this is the main reason why kernel-maintenance is organized non-democratic (and has always been). Sometimes you just get nowhere if 5 brilliant people (_no_ sarcasm here) talk about at least 6 brilliant, but completely different, ideas. > > "People are shipping it, so it must be good" is the proverbial > > road-to-hell-paved-with-good-intentions. > > Mmmm ... not sure what that says about the vendor kernels ;-) As we all know it just says everything. > But I'm well aware that that's in disagreement with others ... having a > separate "common-vendor" tree is probably the right thing to do. dear Martin, dear Jeff, dear all, _please_ be honest and realistic: we are talking about the problem of vendors forking around yakr (Yet Another Kernel Release) and you really say "lets solve it all with _another_ fork" ?? Come on, don't be silly (tm Linus). Let's focus and not fork. There _are_ issues with 2.4, but they are getting solved bit-by-bit. It would be faster of course if we all would concentrate on the _mainline_ and not on yet-another patchlist, split-tree or whatever. Another thing has already been talked about here, so lets talk real open about it: some of us are living in the strong impression that Marcelo has problems with the pure time working on maintaining. I do not know anything about the backgrounds, but if this is really true, then let _me_ ask Conectiva if there is a chance that he can do the maintaining full-time. I mean this is for sure one of the interesting PR activities, too. After all those years it is still true: there can be only one. Of course this only makes sense if he still really wants to do that. _Me_ asking this because I am in no way related to any other distro, vendor or Marcelo, just being the "linux-enthusiast from next-door" (with management background ;-). JMHO Stephan - 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/