Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754834AbXJ0OH5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:07:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752188AbXJ0OHt (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:07:49 -0400 Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:59063 "EHLO out1.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751645AbXJ0OHr (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Oct 2007 10:07:47 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: 65I/76i4T8pr3bMQKDAoENXz5KI1fRPZFdVMTAz/EFBt 1193494066 Message-ID: <4723462D.2010002@imap.cc> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 16:07:41 +0200 From: Tilman Schmidt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de-AT; rv:1.8.1.4) Gecko/20070509 SeaMonkey/1.1.2 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: Adrian Bunk , Simon Arlott , Chris Wright , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Jan Engelhardt , Linus Torvalds , Andreas Gruenbacher , Thomas Fricaccia , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , James Morris , Crispin Cowan , Giacomo Catenazzi , Alan Cox Subject: eradicating out of tree modules (was: Linux Security *Module* Framework) References: <20071023051642.GA3908@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <471E9260.6000704@goop.org> <20071023220649.5a76af82@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <55615.simon.1193226629@5ec7c279.invalid> <20071024125533.GE30533@stusta.de> <471F8AC5.9080300@simon.arlott.org.uk> <20071024223124.GI30533@stusta.de> <4721221A.1020309@imap.cc> <20071026025647.GC21408@kroah.com> <4721B77F.8070102@imap.cc> <20071026155833.GF23016@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20071026155833.GF23016@kroah.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1744 Lines: 42 Greg KH schrieb: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 11:46:39AM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote: >> [...] I still think there will always be >> a number of external modules that cannot be merged right now or at >> all, and deliberately making life difficult for out-of-tree code >> maintainers in order to coerce them into submitting their code for >> inclusion in the kernel will not work, it'll only create bad >> feelings. > > Do you have examples of proof of this? No proof in the legal, mathematical or scientific sense of the term, but examples: - at least one talented kernel developer giving up his work, until then maintained out of tree, after submitting it for inclusion in the kernel and taking the ensuing fla^Wdiscussion on LKML (nothing extraordinary, just the usual lack of courtesy and respect) too much to heart - the furious flames on LKML each time someone dares posting helpful information about getting non-GPL software working again with the newest kernel version, which will certainly never achieve inclusion of that software in the kernel but definitely create bad feelings on both sides (righteous indignation *is* a bad feeling in my book) > Read Documentation/stable_api_nonsense.txt for how we already make > out-of-tree code developer's lives hell :) Oh yes, that one. A key piece of evidence. Yes, I've read it, though I sometimes wish I hadn't. Its very title supports my observation on the creation of bad feelings, and the actual text doesn't contradict it. (no ":)") T. - 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/