Re: [ck] Re: Swap prefetch merge plans

[jos poortvliet]

Op Friday 09 February 2007, schreef Con Kolivas:
> On Saturday 10 February 2007 00:13, jos poortvliet wrote:
> > Nobody has said anything about costs, indeed. Now afaik, swap prefetch is
> > designed to have no/as little as possible costs, so that makes sense.
> > Does it have to have some bugs, which have to be adressed, before it can
> > enter? I'm sure this can be arranged, right, Con?
> >
> > Sorry if I sound sarcastic. I'm no hacker myself, and sometimes these
> > discussions don't make sense to me. A bit like the Staircase thingy ->
> >
> > "hi, I've got this piece of code which does the same as that piece, but
> > better"
> > "Why didn't you improve the old code?"
> > "This is a better design -> half the code but doing a better job"
> > "Well, it's not tested as much, so it won't go in. Go away!"
> >
> > There where those comments from Torvalds some time ago in an interview,
> > about the kernel community becoming harder to get involved with. As an
> > outsider, it sure seems so. I read frustrations everywhere. What about
> > the kevent guy, his blog: http://tservice.net.ru/~s0mbre/blog
> >
> > I stumbled upon it when reading LWN. Seems pretty sad... I don't get the
> > technical stuff, but the frustration almost blows up your monitor. Is
> > there something fundamentally wrong with the kernel-hackers-culture, or
> > are these incidents?
>
> I greatly appreciate the support. Truly I do.
>
> But I do not like the direction this argument is going. Please let it go.

Ok. I appologize to those who might have felt attacked, this wasn't meant 
personally to anybody, more to the community as a whole.

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature