Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23

[Thomas Gleixner]

Randy,

On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 14:02 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: 
> I certainly haven't.  I can barely keep up with reading about 1/2
> of lkml emails.  And in my non-scientific method, I think that we
> are suffering from both (a) more patch submittals and (b) fewer
> qualified reviewers (per kernel KLOC) than we had 3-5 years ago.
> 
> I don't see how you can expect Andrew to review these or any other
> specific patchset.  Do you have some suggestions on how to clone
> Andrew?

Ingo was talking to Andi, the x86_64 maintainer, not to Andrew.

And I share his opinion that the maintainer of the subsystem, which is
affected by such a fundamental patch, could have at least shown any
public sign of interest, disgust, comment or what ever in a 3+ month
time frame.

Especially about a patch, which is a logical consequence of an almost
two years public and transparent effort to consolidate the time code in
the kernel.

I for my part have no problem maintaining the set for another round out
of tree and weed out eventually problems in -mm, but my expectation for
qualified response of the responsible maintainer is exactly zero right
now.

Thanks,

	tglx


-
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/