Re: [ck] Re: Linus 2.6.23-rc1

From: Sam Ravnborg
Date: Sun Jul 29 2007 - 15:24:56 EST


On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 08:23:31PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Sonntag 29 Juli 2007 schrieb Sam Ravnborg:
> > On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 12:56:28PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > > Am Sonntag 29 Juli 2007 schrieb Sam Ravnborg:
> > > > > I
> > > > > actually also think that the communication between Ingo and Con
> > > > > could have been better especially when Ingo decided to write CFS
> > > > > while Con was still working hard on SD.
> > > >
> > > > You realize that Ingo posted his code for anyone to look at/comment
> > > > at about 48 hours after he started to work on CFS?
> > >
> > > Yes.
> >
> > So whats wrong then?
> > Ingo decides to do a better scheduler - to some extent inspired by
> > Con's work. And after 48 hours he publish first version that _anyone_
> > can see and comment on. Whats wrong with that?
> >
> > Did you expect some lengthy discussion before the coding phase started
> > or what?
> >
> > Just trying to understand what you are arguing about.
>
> If I tried to rewrite a kernel subsystem - should I ever happen to dig
> that deep into kernel matters - while I actually know that someone
> already spent countless hours on exactly rewriting the exact same
> subsystem, I think I would have told that other developer about it as
> soon as I started coding on it.
The usual way to communicate such things on lkml are with patches as also
happened in this case.
It's not like Ingo had secretly developing a scheduler in parallel for
weeks or months but.
But I assume all the fuzz is about something else - it cannot be about
a these 48 hours - I hope..

Enough on this - back to work.

Sam
-
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/