Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a singleproject

[Avi Kivity]

On 03/22/2010 04:32 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Avi Kivity<avi@xxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
>
>    
> > On 03/22/2010 02:44 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >      
> > > This is why i consider that line of argument rather dishonest ...
> > >        
> > I am not going to reply to any more email from you on this thread.
> >      
> Because i pointed out that i consider a line of argument intellectually
> dishonest?
>
> I did not say _you_ as a person are dishonest - doing that would be an ad
> honimen attack against your person. (In fact i dont think you are, to the
> contrary)
>
> An argument can certainly be labeled dishonest in a fair discussion and it is
> not a personal attack against you to express my opinion about that.
>
>    

Sigh, why am I drawn into this.

A person who uses dishonest arguments is a dishonest person.  When you 
say I use a dishonest argument you are implying I am dishonest.  Why do 
you argue with me at all if you think I am trying to cheat?

If you disagree with me, tell me I am wrong, not dishonest (or that my 
arguments are dishonest).  And this is just one example in this thread.  
Seriously, tools/kvm would cause a loss of developers, not a gain, 
simply because of the style of argument of some people on this list.  
Maybe qemu/kernels is a better idea.

Again, if you want to talk to me, use the same language you'd like to 
hear yourself.  Or maybe years of lkml made you so thick skinned you no 
longer understand how to interact with people.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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/