Re: Preempt-RT patch for 2.6.25


On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 10:43 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Daniel Walker <dwalker@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Since it's code that you regard stale it shouldnt be all that hard
to fix it up - in general it's much easier to fix a bug than to talk
it out of existence, even if you disagree with a maintainer about
how significant a bug is.

It shouldn't be hard, but it's too much to do all in one go. [...]

this sort of "it was too hard for me but I expect the maintainers to
clean up the mess" stance, combined with an aggressive, uncompromising,
demanding tone towards the maintainers of a project wont get you very
far in contributing to any open-source project. You are not their boss,
you have to learn to work with them instead of trying to force your
opinion on them. They clearly try to work with you and gave a
straightforward technical description of how your contribution would be
acceptable to the project. All the rest is just a waste of everyone's
time that could be better spent on improving the project. JFYI.

It's not "too hard for me" it's a matter of correctness. As if I would
ever say that Ingo ..

I'm not forcing my opinion on anyone. I'm assuming cleanup are
acceptable, especially bisect cleanup (when your code isn't bisectable).
My position is based on that.

You release a dirty -rt tree and expect no one will clean it up, and
further more if they do clean up your code you just toss the work aside
like it's pointless. I take it you don't want clean ups. From my
perspective you should be thanking me.

Had Steven simple said "Please include all the architecture" a month ago
when I released my code, I may have actually done that.

This thread is in no way a plea to get my code included. My code never
had a chance to be included anyway ..

Daniel

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Preempt-RT patch for 2.6.25
    ... So please fix this bug in your refactoring of the queue, ... maintainers to accept buggy contributions. ... for no good reason. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Preempt-RT patch for 2.6.25
    ... to fix it up - in general it's much easier to fix a bug than to talk ... how significant a bug is. ... demanding tone towards the maintainers of a project wont get you very ... far in contributing to any open-source project. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Tk/OSX
    ... would be useful if you had the bug number... ... > # point griping about bugs not getting fixed by the maintainers if we ... > I've given up getting other people to fix the official sources. ... ** Daniel A. Steffen ...
    (comp.lang.tcl)
  • Re: Measure without tape measure.
    ... #3 Needs to be replaced with...Get a teenager to clean their room. ... Fix a dead outlet ... Clean a bolt-action rifle ... Hook up an HDTV ...
    (rec.woodworking)
  • Re: [git] CFS-devel, group scheduler, fixes
    ... clean up schedstat block in dequeue_entity ... sched: sched_setschedulerfix ... sched: optimize vruntime based scheduling ... sched: simplify check_preemptmethods ...
    (Linux-Kernel)