Hi,
On Wednesday 08 February 2006 08:33, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 February 2006 16:59, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday 08 February 2006 00:11, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 08 February 2006 09:02, Pavel Machek wrote:
}-- snip --{
> > > > Lee is a programmer. He wants faster swsusp, and improving uswsusp is
> > > > currently best way to get that. It may be alpha/beta quality, but
> > > > someone has to start testing, and Lee should be good for that (played
> > > > with realtime kernels etc...). Actually it is in good enough state
> > > > that I'd like non-programmers to test it, too.
> > >
> > > Ok. So Lee might be ok to test uswsusp. But this is your approach
> > > regardless of who is emailing you. You consistently tell people to fix
> > > problems themselves and send you a patch. That's not what a maintainer
> > > should do. They're supposed to maintain, not get other people to do the
> > > work. They're supposed to be helpful, not a source of anxiety. You might be
> > > the maintainer of swsusp in name, but you're not in practice. Please, lift
> > > your game!
> >
> > I strongly disagree with this opinion. I don't think there's any problem with
> > Pavel, at least I haven't had any problems in communicating with him.
>
> You seem to be the only person around who gets on well with him.
Well, that's probably because I always do my best to be nice and follow the
rules that Pavel sets. I post patches to modify the existing code and not to
replace it top-down. I keep them as compact as reasonably possible
and focus on one thing at a time. I remove the parts that Pavel and other
people don't like or I try to modify these parts to be more acceptable.
Etc. This is not _that_ difficult.
> Please, more people step up and tell me I'm wrong. I am only going off the
> mailing list afterall, and not daily personal interaction of some other kind.
>
> > Moreover, I don't think the role of maintainer must be to actually write the
> > code. From my point of view Pavel is in the right place, because I need
> > someone to tell me if I'm going to do something stupid who knows the kernel
> > better than I do.
>
> By definition, if they don't maintain code, their not a maintainer. If they
> only tell someone that they're going to do something stupid, they're a
> code reviewer.
Well, this is your opinion.
In my opinion a maintainer need not be a developer. The dictionary definition
of "to maintain" is "to keep a road, machine, building, etc. in good condition"
(http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=48204&dict=CALD)
which need not impy any development.
Greetings,
Rafael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]