Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759552AbYHFKvq (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 06:51:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755620AbYHFKvh (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 06:51:37 -0400 Received: from smtp4.pp.htv.fi ([213.243.153.38]:53503 "EHLO smtp4.pp.htv.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755449AbYHFKvf (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 06:51:35 -0400 Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 13:50:08 +0300 From: Adrian Bunk To: tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com Cc: Greg KH , Arjan van de Ven , "Press, Jonathan" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, malware-list@lists.printk.net Subject: Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linuxinterfaceforon access scanning Message-ID: <20080806105008.GF6477@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> References: <20080805202621.GA27489@kroah.com> <20080806100638.9FD672FE8E3@pmx1.sophos.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080806100638.9FD672FE8E3@pmx1.sophos.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2530 Lines: 58 On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 11:05:43AM +0100, tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com wrote: > Greg KH wrote on 05/08/2008 21:26:21: > > > > [JON PRESS] I wouldn't call it lazy, actually. It's more like > > > "economical" or "ergonomic" -- or, dare I say it -- "user-friendly." > In > > > this case, the users are the AV vendors who will have to write to the > > > API that will come out of this spec. We will be more inclined to > > > appreciate the SDK (for want of a better term) if it covers all the > > > bases, rather than force us to go elsewhere for some of our > > > requirements. When we write SDKs, we try to make sure that our users > > > will find whatever they need. > > > > But realize that you are adding an overhead on us, the kernel community, > > to make your life easier. We are the ones that are taking our time to > > review and comment on this code. We are the ones who will have to live > > with this code for forever, and maintain it over the lifetime of linux. > > So far, you all have shown no willingness to give anything back to us at > > all. > > We all? How is that true? I for example wrote some code and am willing to > help maintain it if it gets accepted. And as you describe it, it would be > true for any submission because not all things are usefull for all people, > while everything is baggage for the community. And who is the community? I > thought all who take place in discussions, bug reporting, submitting code, > fixing bugs etc are the community. As an observer of this thread: - Some set of requirements suddenly appears out of the void on linux-kernel. - Noone is able and/or willing to exactly describe the problem(s) they are trying to solve. With this status quo the discussion is going nowhere - Linux kernel development does not work this way. The aim is not to include this code, but to find the best technical solution for your problem(s) - no matter whether this will have anything in common with the list of requirements and the code posted or not. > Tvrtko cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- 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/