Message-ID: <4C72CEB9.4000008@vlnb.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 23:40:41 +0400
From: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@vlnb.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100527 Thunderbird/3.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gennadiy Nerubayev <parakie@gmail.com>
CC: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>,
        scst-devel <scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...
References: <4C69653E.6050808@vlnb.net>	<1282077040.16098.47.camel@mulgrave.site>	<4C6C1DC1.8090208@vlnb.net>	<1282164188.10878.22.camel@mulgrave.site>	<4C702030.2070306@vlnb.net>	<1282423128.3015.35.camel@mulgrave.site> <AANLkTin9STqUz440fCOEWW=YmedVQtQWU2JLO2wZCt5j@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin9STqUz440fCOEWW=YmedVQtQWU2JLO2wZCt5j@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1003
Lines: 20

Gennadiy Nerubayev, on 08/23/2010 02:10 AM wrote:
> I'm not sure if I understand why there is a need for a replacement
> target to reuse existing code, and would definitely appreciate a brief
> explanation or a pointer to an earlier one. But even that aside, I'm
> curious if the criteria for what a replacement target must have for
> (at least potential) inclusion into the kernel were ever clearly
> outlined in the past. If they were, then there probably would have
> been things like interested contenders, deadlines, feature
> comparisons, code reviews, and so on, right?

A fair public review of SCST code with a fair _public_ comparison 
without any deals and conspiracy behind our back is, basically, all we 
are asking. Let the best code win.

Vlad
--
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/