Subject: Re: [take12 0/3] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
From: Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: jmorris@namei.org, johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       drepper@redhat.com, akpm@osdl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
       zach.brown@oracle.com, hch@infradead.org
In-Reply-To: <20060822.133606.48392664.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <1156237191.8055.59.camel@entropy>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608221059030.26026@d.namei>
	 <1156276823.2476.22.camel@entropy>
	 <20060822.133606.48392664.davem@davemloft.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 14:13:40 -0700
Message-Id: <1156281220.2476.65.camel@entropy>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1184
Lines: 32

On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 13:36 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 13:00:23 -0700
> 
> > I'm not the one proposing the new (potentially wrong) interface. The
> > onus isn't on me.
> 
> You can't demand a volunteer to do work, period.
> 
> If it matters to you, you have the option of doing the work.
> Otherwise you can't complain.

So if a volunteer does bad work, I'm obligated to accept it just because
I haven't done better?

Alternately, if a volunteer does bad work, must it be merged into the
kernel because there's isn't a better implementation? (I believe that
was tried at least once with devfs.)

And how is the quality of the work to be judged if the work isn't
commented, documented and explained, especially the userland-visible
parts that *cannot* *ever* *be* *changed* *or* *removed* once they're in
a stable kernel release?

-- 
Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>

-
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/